How The Death Penalty Saves Lives by David B. Muhlhausen

Essay, Pages 3 (710 words)

Views

Good morning ladies and gentlemen, my name is Luke Greenfield I’m here to argue the con side of the following resolution, Resolved: The Death Penalty in all its forms should be discontinued in the United States. Key terms to define for this debate are as follows: Death Penalty - the punishment of execution, administered to someone legally convicted of a capital crime, Forms - a particular way in which a thing exists or appears; a manifestation, Discontinued - to put an end to; stop; terminate.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get your custom essay on

“ How The Death Penalty Saves Lives by David B. Muhlhausen ”

Get custom paper

NEW! smart matching with writer

My framework for this debate is a cost benefit analysis which is as follows: More lives will be saved with a death penalty in place. My contentions for this debate are as follows:

Contention One: Fewer Murders. In the article “How The Death Penalty Saves Lives” by David B. Muhlhausen, he referenced a study conducted by Emory University that said: “For instance, a 2003 study by Emory University researchers of data from more than 3,000 counties from 1977 through 1996 found that each execution, on average, resulted in 18 fewer murders per county.

”The role of the death penalty is to puish people who have done hyannis crimes and detter people from doing those same crimes. Also in another testimony by David B. Muhlhausen, he stated that “First, each execution, on average, is associated with three fewer murders. The deterred murders included both crimes of passion and murders by intimates Second, executions deter the murder of whites and African-Americans. Each execution prevents the murder of one white person, 1.5 African-Americans, and 0.

5 persons of other races.”This quote from the article proves that there are lives that are saved because of the death penalty. In the article “Studies Confirm: Death Penalties Deter Many Murders at Far Less Cost by, yet again, David B. Muhlhausen he proclaims that “In 2008, Drexel University economist Bijou Yang and psychologist David Lester of Richard Stockton College of New Jersey conducted a comprehensive review of capital punishment research. They concluded that, since 1975, the majority of studies tracking effects over many years and across states or counties found a deterrent effect.” This article proves that the death penalty does detter some people from doing these crimes. These three statements support the idea of a reduction in murder rates and therefore saves more lives.

Contention Two: Reduced Crime Rates. In the article “Capital Punishment Works” by Roy D. Adler and Michael Summersit, they state that “The conclusion that each execution carried out is associated with the saving of dozens of innocent lives creates an extraordinarily difficult moral dilemma for those who campaign against the death penalty.”. This means that with capital punishment in place, there is less crime that happens. As well as that in the article “Death Penalty Deters Murders, Studies Say” by Sean Alfano he says that “whether the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder. The analyses say yes. They count between three and 18 lives that would be saved by the execution of each convicted killer.”. This excerpt from the article is saying that between three and eighteen people are saved because of capital punishment in place. These two statements alone prove that capital punishment/the death penalty deter crime.

Contention Three: Capital Punishment Is Morally Justified. In the article “Death Penalty: is capital punishment morally justified?” by Jeffrey Howard he states in the article that “ “Bad guys deserve to suffer.” This is a blunt slogan, but it captures the essence of a deeply familiar notion: people who have committed culpable wrongs deserve their lives to get worse as a result.'' This quote proves that people that do terrible crimes should be punished for their crimes. In the article “Lethal Injection” by Amnesty International it states that “Lethal injection was designed to prevent many of the disturbing images associated with other forms of execution.”. This quote proves that, in fact, the death penalty was designed to be humane and moral not inhumane and immoral. These two pieces of evidence show how the death penalty is morally justified and humane.

My three contentions were as follows: Reduced Murder Rates, Reduced Crime Rates, and Capital Punishment is Morally Justified. These contentions prove that the death penalty saves lives and lessen crime rates . That is why you should vote con ballot judge, thank you for your time.