Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 3

A Matter of Life or Death: A compare and contrast essay The most usual penalties for extremely vicious crimes

offenders are life in penitentiary, normally with no bail chances, or the penalty of death. Though both penalties successfully interrupt the convicted criminals ability to hurt other people, for several causes determining which penalty is proper for specific circumstances have become an argumentative matter; the massive monetary burden, lacking of data concerning reoffending, and unpredictable non-biased penalty application are the most dominant matters.

Making a cost based decision, when it contains a matter of death or life, is a luckless truth concerning the economic trouble faced by several federal and state government organizations. On the word of a state-appointed board examining the effectiveness and viability of the penalty of death in Maryland, costs of litigation while looking for the penalty of death are, $1.9 million more than a similar case in which prosecutors seek life in prison (Rein, 2008, pg 15). In Maryland, over the last 30 years, 77 criminals were sentenced to death by judges; those verdicts, though, only bring about 5 executions, at $146.3 million supplementary cost (Rodricks, 2008). Conversely, the average cost per year to feed, house, and deliver medicinal care for a convict is about $68,000 (Rodricks, 2008). 30 years in penitentiary would recompense for the up-front economic drawback of impeaching cases of death penalty if considered entirely on the additional costs of litigation against long-term incarceration expenditures. Though both likely penalties have possible financial assistances, neither method is suitable in every case. It must also be consider that as a crime deterrent, how effective incarceration and capital punishments are. A commonly accepted method is punishing criminals that is planned to lessen repeat offenses and discourage violent crime; however, in Maryland, the convened panel determined, the threat of execution is not a deterrent to crime (Rein, 2008, pg 15). Moreover,

several criminals dont consider death penalty as a practical threat because it is enforced infrequently. Only 1 in 6000 murders, from 1967-1996, bring about an execution of death penalty (Sharp, 1997) Different understanding affects several significant stages in the process of death penalty because of the complicated system prepared to lessen the prospect for the court of law to implement a guiltless person in error. It begins with the action being permitted to choose whether looking for the penalty of death is suitable. Consequently, if imprisoned, the law court then chooses which sentence to execute. The jurisdictional system has applied significant death penalty verdicts irreconcilably in several examples. For instance, prosecutors in Baltimore County were about 13 times more likely to pursue the death penalty as those in the city of Baltimore (Rein, 2008, pg14). According to another study, of more than 1,300 death-eligible homicide cases from 1978 to 1999 killers of white victims were 2 times more likely to face the death penalty than killers of African-Americans (Rodricks, 2008, pg 8). In the prison sentences application, related variations also exist. Rates of imprisonment varied considerably grounded on the offenders demographics. Conflictingly applied decisions give the impression in several areas comprising both age and race, however not to as same level as gender (Kons-Witt, 2002). Females, specifically those with kids, are 31% less expected to be given prison punishments than males sentenced of similar offences (Koons-Witt, 2002). In defining how sentences are applied, these extensive deviances create argument. Death penalties, together with life in prison are the two most commonly arranged penalties for offenders imprisoned of very violent offenses. Certainly, deprived of an active punishing system to discourage offenders, criminality will endure to rise. Inappropriately, neither the death penalty nor life in prison has efficiently compact violent criminality. The continuing financial problems,

marginal efficiency, and unreliable punishments application all indicate a system of broken penal.

References Sharp, D. (1997, October 1). Death penalty and sentencing information. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from http://prodeathpenalty.com/dp.html Rodricks, D. (2008, December 16). Report may put final nail in death penalty. Tribune Business News. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from ProQuest database. Rein, L. (2008, November 13). Panel calls for abolition of death penalty; System is open to error, costs too much and fails to deter crime, members say. The Washington Post, p. B8. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from ProQuest database. Koons-Witt, B. A. (2002, May). The effect of gender on the decision to incarcerate before and after the introduction of sentencing guidelines. Criminology, 40(2), 297-328. Retrieved from ProQuest database. Lincoln Journal Star, p. 2. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from ProQuest database.