And you know my name is the Government, when I lay my vengenence upon thee (Blue and Orange)9/22/2011 Read the two articles regarding capital punishment one two. Why were there protestors at one and not the other? Does the stays of execution in the Troy Davis case constitute "cruel and unusual punishment"? Given both of these case took place more than 10 years ago, is it reasonable to argue that capital punishment serves as a deterent to crime? What would be the danger of speeding up the process? What other function besides detering crime does capital punishment serve? Finally if you find this subject interesting read this last article (very short). How many countries still have the death penalty? What are some examples? What do the countries who do not use the death penalty have in common? What is the trend concerning the use of the death penalty? What are some reasons for that trend?
20 Comments
Chris Gomez
9/22/2011 11:38:36 am
They were protesting the Troy Davis execution because he said he was innocent and he didnt do it, but cared not for the White supremacist because in American minds this is wrong. It does show "cruel and unusual punishment" because he was continually saying that he was innocent and they thought it was a racist notion. I think that it does need to deter some punishment. They had already spent a long time in prison why not just keep them there? The danger would be that more people would protest the case. The other function could be to possibly lower the convicts sentencing or punishment. 23 countries still have the death penalty. China, Iran, and North Korea are examples of countries which still issue the death penalty. All the countries who do not sentence it have in common that they believe its wrong and costly. They believe that it could result in the death of officials.
Reply
Tyler Kelly
9/23/2011 04:36:25 pm
There were protestors at Davis' case because he had been told he'd be executed then it was postponed more than one time, and people considered this cruel and unusual punishment. There weren't protestors at the other trial because what the men did was cruel and people believed that a death penalty was needed because of it. I would say it was cruel and unusual punishment because Davis had expected to be executed but then had his sentence postponed more than once, and it would be mental torment. I would say capital punishment would be reasonable. If the process was sped up it might cause people to protest. Capital punishment could lower the degree of sentencing for convicts.
Reply
Peter Del Bondio
9/24/2011 03:40:04 am
There were protestors at the Davis execution because there is the possibility that he was not guilty. He pleaded innocent until minutes before he was killed. In comparison there weren’t any protestors at the White Supremacist execution because it was very apparent that the man was guilty and it was an incredibly inhumane crime. I believe the Davis case constitutes as “cruel and unjust punishment” because even though he was said to be guilty, there is the chance he was innocent all along. I believe that capital punishment is constantly loitering in the back of people’s minds while they commit felonies, but I believe that the main problem with speeding up the process is that there could end up being a surplus of criminals that are executed as an innocent humans. Capital punishment serves as the cruelest punishment for those who committed inhumane and absolutely terrible crimes. There are currently twenty three counties that still have the death penalty. China, Iran, North Korea, and Yemen make up the majority of the executions. One main reason why countries don’t use the death penalty is because of how expensive it is. The major trend concerning the use of the death penalty in California is that the majority of prisoners sentenced to it are blacks or poor people.
Reply
Emily Griffin
9/24/2011 06:16:47 am
Protesting occurred around the death sentence of Troy Davis because there was still a possibility of his innocence, he never admitted to being guilty and so he created a group of faithful followers who protested his death. Lawrence Brewer’s trial was a very different because no one believed him to be innocent and most felt he deserved his death for putting another innocent human being through cruel and unusual punishment. I believe that Davis’s trial could be considered cruel and unusual punishment because of the false hope they gave him while they looked into his trial again. It was cruel to keep him alive only to kill him later. The final considerations for his trial should have taken place before his last day. Capital Punishment is a deterrent to crime, or should be for many people. However, it can be a frightening thing when the person being tried has even the slightest possibility of innocence. I believe that Capital Punishment should only be charged to those who truly truly deserve it, so no innocent people are killed. And the danger of speeding up the process could also result in more innocent people killed if new information becomes available, the long time provides time for remorse, forgiveness and new development.
Reply
Ken Marsh
9/24/2011 03:09:51 pm
People protested at the death sentence of Troy Davis, because he considered himself innocent until his last breath. When he was about to be given the death sentence he wasn't even bitter, but was calm till the end. On the other hand Lawrence Brewer had not a soul to protest for him, because what he did was considered truly "cruel and unusual punishment," which should be punished by the death sentence. Dragging someone behind your vehicle is a very terrible thing to do. Even though Brewer's trial was the correct way to kill him, Davis should not have been killed, because of the flawed evidence. The idea of Capital Punishment is reasonable, but to a certain extent. Someone should be put through execution. as long as the crime is bad enough. It seems that today in twenty three countries Capital Punishment is still done. They main ones where Capital punishment is practiced today are the following, China, Iran, North Korea, and Yemen. The trend of abolishing the idea of Capital Punishment is gaining momentum because it cost too much, and funding is low.
Reply
Jacob Gallagher
9/24/2011 04:30:39 pm
There were protestors at Davis death sentence because there was not enough evidence to prove him guilty. There were no protestors at the white supremacist death sentence because there were enough evidence and witnesses to find him guilty, he was also a known member of the Ku Klux Klan. Davis case falls under "cruel and unusual punishment" because their was not enought evidence to sentence someone to death, especially after his last words were basically i am not guilty. I do think that the death penilty will make people think twice about commiting a crime but i dont think the people who commit these types of crimes will stop because of a law and most of them dont believe they will get caught. The dangers of speeding up the process would be that there would not be enough time to get all the evidence and make sure you are not taking the life away from an innocent person. I think that capitial punishment also serves as a basis for our country and what we are as a country, it also shows the rest of the world that we arn't soft.
Reply
Omar Garcia
9/24/2011 05:34:07 pm
There wasn't enough evidence to provehim guilty, so there were protesters at Davis death sentence. Before he was killed, he pleaded innocent.
Reply
Brionna Gonzalez
9/25/2011 01:08:07 pm
The protesting happened at the Davis case because there wasn't enough evidence to give him a death sentence. He pleaded not guilty all through to his death. Not once did he plead guilty. The White Supremacist didn't have protestors because they had enough evidence. It would be cruel and unusual punnishment because they should have been givin more time to show what actually happened. He hadn't deserved to die yet. Speeding up the process would give less time for people to show the truth, people being tried and shown as guilty or not guilty. people could either get away with some serious things or be givin a punishment they don't deserve. Capitol punishment should only be givin to the people who desverve that, not to the people who don't deserve it. Two-thirds of the states still have the death penalty, No one should die if they don't deserve it.
Reply
Toby Bason
9/29/2011 02:10:04 pm
There were many protestors at Davis' execution because many believed he was wrongly accused. He kept with his plea of not guilty throughout the whole case yet he could not sway the judges. This case should be ruled as cruel and unusual punishment becaus his particular case was not given enough time or attention to exhaust all of the evidence. As for the white supremacists there is a universal view amongst Americans that this is wrong therefore there were non protesting these men being put on death row. I think speeding up trials is obviously more efficient to move criminals or maybe non-criminals through our court system but if it were a case where you were convicted of killing someone you would definitely want them to take time on the investigation if you were intact not guilty, so a balance should be found. I think Capitol punishment is useful to weed out the criminals who have commited terrible crimes, as we would not want them on our towns streets free to do as they please, thus Capitol punishment is useful and just.
Reply
Gemma Aquilina
9/29/2011 03:30:14 pm
In my opinion, capital punishment does not serve as a deterent for crime. In fact, I believe that to serve a life sentence in prison is punishment enough. Imprisonment is punishment enough. The death sentence is essentially and end to punishement. And if only the worst criminals are sentenced to death, aren't they getting away with a lighter punishment? Essentially they get away with less punishment than criminals who have commited a lighter crime. The executions of Troy Davis and Lawrence Russel Byrd, are examples of why capital punishment is disfunctional. Until his death, Davis pleaded innocent. His last hours were spent praying that his his sentence would be commuted. More than once, Davis was given the hope that his sentence had been commuted only to be disappointed. It is understandable that people assembled to protest. A possibly innocent had to spend the last moments under the false hope that he would be able to live. I would consider what Davis had to endure unusual punishment. Crimes that could possibly lead to capital punishment, should in no circumstance be sped up. The courts have to have solid evidence and reason that a suspect is guilty before sentencing them to death. If the process were to be sped up, the chance of convicting an innocent person would increase.
Reply
Lydia Erickson
10/1/2011 01:08:26 pm
In some cases capital punishment is a deterrent to crime, but in other cases, the motives of the criminal are more deeply rooted. For example in the case with the white supremacist dragging the black man. The white man took his punishment without complaint, because he was so insanely hateful toward black people, that he was willing to die to prove his point. The death penalty would not prevent people like this from committing crimes. Speeding up the process of capital punishment would result in the possible death of innocent people. The man who was proven guilty for the death of a police officer was still saying he was innocent after ten years, which made it more believable. If it had been a year he could have easily been thought guilty, which could be true for more if the process was faster. Other than the deterrent of crime, some believe that capital punishment serves justice. They believe that a person who ends a life, deserves death themselves. The families of those killed feel satisfaction in the death of someone who murdered their family member. However capital punishment can also be looked at as hypocritical. If the government kills someone who has killed, then they're no better than them, its just fighting violence with violence. As we've seen with these two cases, there are many different cases that stir this controversy further.
Reply
Maddie Conover
10/3/2011 10:18:18 am
In the case of Troy Davis, doubt was the reason why the public protested his death. There was no DNA evidence, and previous witness accounts were later swayed; in addition, Davis maintained his innocence through the whole process. The case against Davis didn’t seem complete, and lacked a radical motive, unlike the murder of James Byrd Jr. There were no protests supporting Lawrence Russell Brewer, John William King, and Shawn Berry because the evidence was clear and there was a hateful, racist motive behind the slaying. White supremacy icons covered the men’s bodies, and their criminal pasts didn’t create any doubt in the public’s minds that these men committed this offense out of radical views and distain. The multiple stays put on Davis’ execution does not qualify as “cruel and unusual punishment” since they weren’t put upon him out of spite, but out of attempts to eliminate his brutal sentence. I think the murder of Byrd supports the idea of capital punishment for horrible crimes do serve as a deterrent to crimes because it shows that horrible crimes supporting views that were previously socially acceptable, are not acceptable in today’s society and will be fiercely punished; potentially removing the attraction to perform similar hate crimes. This is reflected in the lack of radical hate crimes within the past ten years. The dangers that could result in speeding up crimes is the passion felt in the moment, convicting more people who are innocent, being distracted by the brutality of the crimes the person supposedly committed rather than looking at the facts of the case. Capital punishment serves not only as a deterrent for people to commit crimes, but serves as justice for the people who have been affected by the crime committed. It can be argued that being alive in any sense, is better than being dead; for if someone has killed someone, it is justified unequal for them to have the luxury of life while their victim lay slain. The United States is one out of twenty three countries since 2010 to employ the death penalty. Some of the other countries in this boat are China, Iran and North Korea. The majority of countries that have a form of capital punishment originate from non democratic and suppressed countries, while countries which have abolished it are overall more European and democratic. The trend that had been observed over the past few decades is a decrease in countries all over the world using this form of punishment. Overall this can be attributed to an increased sensitivity to human rights and that idea that certain groups have been targeted for death penalty convictions.
Reply
Kevin Churchill
10/3/2011 02:17:28 pm
The death penalty has always been controversial, and this controversy was highlighted by two executions. Troy Davis was convicted of killing an off duty police officer and sentenced to death. Lawrence Russel Brewer, a white supremacist, was also sentenced to death, but for a far more cruel crime. At Davis' execution, protesters were abundant, but there was a distinct dearth of protesters at Brewer's execution. The abundance of protesters at Davis' execution is a direct result of doubt; many people were unsure that Davis was in fact the real killer. However, at the Brewer execution, protesters were nowhere to be found, a direct result of the heinous nature of his crime. The stays on Davis' execution were by no means "cruel and unusual punishment, as they were meant to eliminate his extreme punishment, not to spite him. It is not reasonable to say that capital punishment serves as a deterrent for crime because neither man showed remorse before the execution. The thought of being executed to those who committed a crime deserving of it isn't as threatening as it is to the everyday person. It may be dangerous to speed up the process because each execution is already extremely controversial, and any more doubt in the people's mind that the person is guilty cannot help the perception of the punishment. Capital punishment really does not serve any significant purposes other than deterring crime, as most people see it as entirely negative.
Reply
Charles Bertoli
10/4/2011 12:01:26 pm
People were protesting the Troy Davis case because they thought that the punishment was too severe. Troy Davis denied throughout his entire trial that he had even committed the murder, raising some questions. Obviously, the murder by dragging had nobody there to protest the death penalty. The death penalty is meant to be the ultimate deterrent, but takes a rather long time to be carried out, making it lose some of it's effect and ends up costing a lot of money. However, if the process was sped up, mistakes may be made in the investigation, leading to innocent deaths. Some people say it'd be worth it to speed it up, others have equally valid arguments as to why it should take as long as it does. America is one of only a few countries left in the world that still has the death penalty, alongside China, Iran, Yemen, and North Korea. Capital Punishment is not meant just to be a deterrent to crime, but also as a type of relief for people close to the victims. "Eye for an eye" punishment puts them a little bit more at ease than if they knew the killer was still alive. The only problem with this is that it sometimes is a preferable option to life imprisonment. If you had to spend the rest of your life locked up, you'd probably end up just wanting to kill yourself, and capital punishment grants the wishes of the worst criminals. I believe that California and other states will soon get rid of the death penalty, and eventually America will join the 2/3 of the world that no longer use it.
Reply
Lupita Alcantar
10/4/2011 02:50:42 pm
Troy Davis was being protested in an execution, because there were some possibilities that he was not guilty of crime. He said he was innocent minutes before he was killed, and for "God to bless there souls" for what they were doing to him; it was inhumane. There weren't any White Supremacist in the execution, because for them Davis was guilty. Davis's case constitute in "cruel and unusual punishment" because there wasn't enough evidence for this crime, that he was convicted guilty. There are 23 countries that still have the death penalty. Some are China (chiefly), Iran, North Korea, and Yemen. A big exception is America, because two-thirds of states still have the death penalty. Of the capital punishment the innocent folk trend to be executed for more, with many, than the deterrent effect of capitol punishment. Before executing someone, they should have the evidence, that's what the Sixth Amendment says and the government should do it right the first time.
Reply
Cassidy Stanton
10/5/2011 03:30:18 pm
Nobody wants to openly protest the death of a known KKK member white supremacist, even if they do believe that capital punishment should end. Where as its easier to protest the death penalty when its for a man who may be innocent. I would argue that the death penalty does fall under the jurisdiction of ' cruel and unusual punishment' in the case of Troy David only because every aspect of his trial is questionable. But the death penalty in general wouldn't be classified at cruel and certainly not unusual. Its not 'cruel' to put a serial killer humanely to rest, but I do believe that that is wrong for the government to kill even a killer. But because of the way the constitution was written, its up to state governments to decide whether or not capital punishment is acceptable.The time given between sentence and execution is perfectly acceptable. It gives time for personal business to be finished and all affairs to be attended to. And if the process was sped up it would look very bad on our governments part. Because if new technology proves the person innocent, other citizens would be very upset. Considering only 23 infamous countries like China and North Korea plus the U.S. still use capital punishment, it is becoming obvious that on a universal level its diminishing in popularity.
Reply
Brian Begerow
10/6/2011 03:45:15 pm
The Troy Davis case was being protested because there was uncertainty in the conviction. Americans want the death penalty to be precise but the judgement becomes very vague as in the case of Davis being accused of murder. On the other hand, the Brewer conviction was not protested at all because nearly everyone would agree that his vicious hate crime was deserving of the death penalty. In the end it all comes down to who decides when someone deserves the death penalty or not. Who draws the line. Davis' case doesn't constitute cruel and unusual punishment because he was never found innocent of the crime. Whether he was truly innocent like he said he was or not, the investigative and judicial system of the US couldn't not give him this punishment on the chance that evidence is missing that proves him innocent. They're doing their jobs to try and maintain justice in our nation. Capital punishment does serve as a deterrent to crime because for some people about to do something might think about the death penalty and there's a possibility that they would change their mind. The US is one of twenty-three countries that still enforce the death penalty, including China and North Korea. The countries that have recently dropped the policy seem to be more democratic. This fall in the use of the death penalty is most likely due to the increased awareness of human rights and it is likely that more and more areas of the world will continue to do away with the seemingly excessively cruel punishment.
Reply
Tyler Anthony
10/6/2011 04:55:10 pm
The protesting of the Troy Davis case happened because there was a possibility that he was innocent. He pleaded innocent right up until he was sentenced to death. The death penalty is very controversial and the fact that there was no actual plea of guilt creates a skeptical view. The reason the Brewer conviction was not protested is because it was obvious that he committed a vicious discriminatory hate crime, considering the fact that he was a member of the KKK. The KKK is not widely supported and therefore there would not be many protestors. Not many people would openly admit that they were supporters of the KKK, which would be evident in there participation in the protest. Capital punishment does not deter crime because the death penalty is not the first thing on someones mind as they committ a hateful crime. The death penalty takes an extremely long time to go through the system, which tells people that there is a possibilty that it will not occur. If the process were to be sped up, there is the possibility of error and innocent people would be subject to "cruel and unusual punishment". It is only reasonable to conclude that capital punishment sholuld only be charged to people who have been proven guilty with concrete evidence and who have committed a crime worthy of death.
Reply
Geoff Thompson
10/11/2011 02:53:56 pm
Both of these articles involve people being put to death as a result of murder convictions. One, however, was a hate crime committed out of Racism while the other was a controversial and highly protested conviction. Many would argue that keeping someone in custody and on death row for over twenty years is cruel and unusual punishment. However, speeding up the process would only increase the likelihood of executing innocent individuals, the main argument against the death penalty. It is hard to argue the point that capital punishment deters crime, although even this is put into question when people like Brewer act so "nonchalant" about being executed. Capital punishment can also allow people to become martyrs (Davis) or serve as public figures in order to prevent others from committing crimes (Brewer). The death penalty is slowly dying out as only 23 countries in the world still practice it. Nearly all of Europe and most developed countries across the world have abolished capital punishment. Instances of executions have dropped off plenty in recent years due to a growing abolitionist movement centered around human rights.
Reply
Kristina Ericson
11/3/2011 12:30:53 pm
The reason for the numerous protests over the Troy Davis case occurred because there was uncertainty in the conviction that Troy Davis was a murderer. The trial was Davis was protested up until his final moments. This trial can be arguably stated as cruel and unusual punishment, yet is not so due to the face that Davis was never in face proven innocent. I believe that the death penalty could ultimately serve as a deterrent to crime, although not enough so to keep the practices of capital punishment in use. Many countries around the world are changing their practices of capital punishment and/or deleting them from their political systems altogether. This drop in government issued deaths has been brought about through an increase in awareness of human rights. Other countries, like the United States, China, and North Korea, continue to rely on capital punishment today as a source of ultimate punishment.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Mr. LPart teacher/part entertainer/ part coach/ part task master Archives
November 2014
Categories |