Arroyo 1

Augustine Jordan Arroyo

Professor Jeffrey Aird
English 1010
30 April 2014
Since the legality of the death penalty became reinstated in 1977, thirty-four states have
commenced the execution of serious and mentally competent legal offenders. Capital punishment
originated in England, being a part of English common law for many felonies across the ages.
Since the United States originated from England and adopted their legal structures, the use of the
death penalty was held out in the original thirteen colonies and was enforced in all the colonies
prior to the Declaration of Independence. After the Declaration of Independence was instated,
the eighth amendment limited the use of this form of execution, resulting in it being used almost
exclusively as a punishment for aggravated murders. The death penalty was used for many years,
but had its usage ceased due to many flaws in the system, and the accusation of innocent people.
However after our detective work had become more reliable, and many other adjoining causes,
capital punishment was reinstated in the US.
Today, there is an argument about the use of the Death Penalty. Whether it should be
used or not regardless of a characters offence. On one side of the argument, people believe that it
is immoral to kill a person no matter the reasoning or the crimes they committed. These people
believe that the person has a potential to change and should instead be confined to prison and the
humane limitations of the law. On the other hand however, the people being executed are
typically cold blooded murderers with no remorse or sympathy for their actions and the lives
they took. Many people feel that these criminals should be executed to save lives in the future
and prevent these crimes from reoccurring. Commonly those who have suffered or lost lives at
Arroyo 2

the hands of these criminals believe that they should be put to death, to add closure to the
victims lives and to ensure no other person must suffer the way they have.
The question my paper is addressing is whether or not the death penalty should continue
to be used. Ill be addressing both sides of the argument to establish the viewpoints and open this
paper up for an equal understanding of both arguments. To do this I will be using examples and
articles written by various authors of differing opinions on the same subject, and conjoining their
thoughts into one reinforcement of similar arguments. I however take the stance that the death
penalty is useful and necessary, and that its use should be continued.
The most common argument made against the death penalty and its purpose is the
argument of morality. Many people believe that it is wrong for a person to decide the death or
life of another being, and that killing them for any reason is inhumane. However, in response to
this argument the criminals who are executed are done so mostly because they have taken lives
from innocent people, and usually with a stable mindset and understanding of what they have
done. These people have also done immoral actions that you are arguing against, and those who
suffer through the experience or are affected by this criminals actions have to live with the
results for the rest of their lives. They have already proven themselves to be inhumane and
immoral, should they not receive the same punishment they decided was fit for another being?
To say it is immoral to execute a criminal who has done the same action, often more than once,
is an unstable and potentially hypocritical argument. An author also states that no rational person
could kill innocent children, they do so because they are evil.
There is also the argument made about people being wrongly accused and executed for
crimes that they never committed. Kirk Bloodsworth was a man who was exonerated from death
row after being held for nine years. He wrote an article addressing the need to abolish the death
Arroyo 3

penalty because of the people who are wrongly accused of their crimes. He provides statistics,
stating that since capital punishment became legal again, 142 people have been exonerated from
death row and proven to be innocent before their execution. Although this is indeed a good
argument, as there is always a potential for the wrong person to be accused, the amount of people
exonerated before their execution show the vast thought and analysis that undergoes each
criminal to show their innocents or prove their guilt. Any person could agree that the justice
system is not infallible, however this argument shows the dedication undergone to ensure
innocence. The study provided by the Death Penalty Information Center, since 1976 only ten
individuals have been found to be wrongly executed and proven innocent, as opposed to at least
1,214 criminals who were never found to be innocent (Death Penalty Information Center).
Greg Dobbs, an author wrote an article in the Denver Post titled "State Inmates Convicted
of Murder Deserve Their Fates." This article addresses the argument from the perspective of
those who have suffered at the hands of these criminals, and provides statements from the wives
of two murdered men supporting the death penalty. The arguments against this say that it is
unjust to allow the people to just be killed instead of living and suffering for the crimes they have
committed. In which, there is a response within other papers that some of these criminals hold no
guilt, and are not apologetic to the victims in any way. Dobbs states that if the wives of the
victims are contempt with criminals being put to death, so is he. Another statement made in other
papers is that allowing these criminals to live on, allows them the potential chance of being
released or recommitting the heinous crimes that put them in prison.
Dobbs also addresses other arguments made against the use of capital punishment in his
paper, and provides seemingly sufficient counter-arguments. The first argument that Dobbs
addresses is the argument that capital punishment is to inhumane. To this criticism, Dobbs
Arroyo 4

responds If you need a simple rebuttal, how about an eye for an eye? (Dobbs). Another
argument addressed in this article against the death penalty is that it is inequitably applied, to
which Dobbs responds by asserting that the court has weighed in on the same argument in the
past, and even suspended legal executions until more equitable sentencing laws were established.
The final argument he addresses in his paper is the argument people make about the death
penalty being outlawed in other states, and that it should be outlawed here as well. To which
Dobbs simply replies So is marijuana (Dobbs).
When it comes to the discussion of the death penalty, most arguments are made
emphasizing pathos, pulling all of the readers and other listeners into the argument through
emotions. This is effective especially in support of capital punishment, as many examples given
to peoples beliefs in the system are from real life events and experiences involving murders and
manslaughters. Several of the authors from articles I dissected used real life examples in this
way. The author Jonathan Kay spoke about the Boston Bombing that took place at a marathon in
Boston that resulted in the death of three people (one of which was an eight year old child) and
injured two hundred sixty other victims. The man who committed this crime had no reasoning
behind his actions, and showed no guilt or remorse for his actions. Another example given in the
articles was about a man who slaughtered an entire family, including a twenty-two month old
infant. The arguments made against the death penalty do not hold as strong of emotional
examples, and do not persuade the readers through the use of emotion.
In conclusion, I still feel that the death penalty is a useful option in todays courts in
regards to severe offenders and criminals. In the argument of morals and capital punishment
being deemed inhumane because of the belief that people should not kill each other regardless of
reasoning, the people who are being held on death row are mostly there because they themselves
Arroyo 5

have murdered and taken lives away from innocent people. To the argument about innocent
people being executed on death row, there is sufficient detective work being held to ensure that
the criminal is guilty beyond a point of doubt before the execution is set to take place which
shows that there is little chance of an actual innocent individual being wrongly killed for a crime
they did not commit.
The vast majority of arguments held against the death penalty are from people with no
life experience of the crimes, and who have never been victimized by the offenders. These
people have never suffered the murder of another being, while the arguments held for the death
penalty are typically originated from being victimized or having suffered because of the heinous
crimes. The arguments for the death penalty strongly affect the emotion of the readers, while
those in opposition try to convince others based on religious beliefs and morals.