About us and our cause
Capital Punishment should be abolished. Within the 14th Amendment, it says: "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of laws." The phrase "life, liberty, and property" comes directly from the Declaration of Independence. The 8th Amendment of the United States defends citizens right against cruel and unusual punishment.
The death penalty does not abide by the 14th amendment. Capital punishment deprives all of those sentenced of their life. Blatantly violating the 14th amendment. It also violates the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. 32 of the 50 states practice capital punishment. Texas is #1 for sentencing the death penalty however, they are ranked 13 in violent crimes and 17 in murders per 100,00 people. This statistic demonstrates the very real issue that the severity of a crime that "should" be sentenced capital punishment varies from state to state. A crime in one state would be punishable by life in prison where that same crime in another state could be punishable by death. Therefore, capital punishment should be abolished because it clearly violates the 14th Amendment of the United States of America.
Lethal injection is, the most popular execution method but others such as electrocution, gas chamber, hanging, and even firing squad are still legal in some states. Lethal injection is the practice of injecting a person with a fatal dose of drugs for the express purpose of causing immediate death. Electrocution is death caused by electric shock. A gas chamber is an apparatus for killing humans or animals with gas, consisting of a sealed chamber into which a poisonous gas is introduced. Hanging is the suspension of a person by a noose around the neck. Execution by firing squad is execution by shooting. Pictures of each or located at the bottom of the "HOME" page. Who has the right to take another persons life? Those who support the death penalty, would you be able to push the button to initiate the electrocution of another human being? or inject the syringe into the arm of someone knowing that you are killing them? What human being should have the right to decide whether another lives or dies? Capital Punishment is a violation of the 8th amendment which defends citizens against cruel and unusual punishment. Some believe that the death penalty is a deterrent, an action meant to prevent or limit crimes that would be punishable by death, however, there is no evidence supporting that rates of violent crimes have decreased due to the threat of capital punishment. The death penalty is a violation of the 8th amendment of the United States and should be considered cruel and unusual punishment.
Another argument for the support of capital punishment is that it is more cost efficient to execute a prisoner than support them with a life sentence in jail without parole. This argument is very wrong. The average cost of an execution by lethal injection, the most commonly used method of execution, is $1.26 million dollars. Whereas the average cost of supporting a prisoner with a life sentence is about $49,000.
There are many commonly asked questions when it comes to capital punishment. Who is to decide who deserves to lose their like as opposed to a life sentence as a result of a crime that has been committed? Are minority groups discriminated against when it comes to the sentencing the death penalty? Where is the line distinguished?
It began in 1972 during the Furman v. Georgia case. It questioned whether the death penalty is inherently cruel and unusual punishment. Ultimately the court ruled that it is constitutional. However, they began to establish restrictions in later cases.
In 1977, Coker v. Georgia, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty is banned for prisoners who are convicted for raping women.
In 1986, Ford v. Wainwright, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty is banned for defendants who are diagnosed as mentally ill.
In 1987, McClesky . Kemp, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty against charges that violated the 14th Amendment because minority defendants were more likely to receive the death penalty than were white defendants.
In 2002, Atkins v. Virginia, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty is banned for all defendants under the age of 18.
Each case brought to the Supreme Court was used to establish restrictions but defended the constitutionality of capital punishment.
In 1985 the Supreme Court answered one of the most frequently asked questions: Where is the line drawn?
Tison v. Arizona: Gary Tison is convicted for armed robbery. While in prison, he befriends a man named Randy Greenwalt who was convicted for murder. Gary's two sons Raymond and Ricky went to visit their father in prison every Sunday. Gary convinces his sons who have no criminal records, to assist him and Randy in an escape from jail. They are successful. During their getaway Gary and Randy killed a confirmed 3 people; however, upon further investigation the men are suspected to have killed 6 people. When the police finally caught up with the group a gun fight broke out and Gary Tison was killed. Randy, Raymond, and Ricky were arrested and brought to trial for 3 murders, car theft, jail break, and more for a total of 92 charges. All 3 men were sentenced to the death penalty even though Ricky and Raymond did not commit the murders, they assisted the crimes. It was clear that Raymond and Ricky did not intend to kill however they did provide the murder weapons and it was determined that they made no effort to help the victims. The court decided that capital punishment is constitutional when the defendant shows a "reckless indifference to the value of human life." The Tison brothers appealed their case many times and it was decided that their sentence would be reduced to life in prison with no parole. Randy was executed in 1997.
"Reckless indifference to the value of human life."
According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights everyone has a right to life. In Article 5 of this document states: "no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment." Many countries including Hungary, South Africa, Lithuania, Ukraine, Albania, and the European Union abide by this statement and therefore do not practice capital punishment.
On April 20, 2005, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights called upon all states that still maintain the death penalty "to abolish the death penalty completely and in the meantime, to establish a moratorium on executions" due to the fact it violates the Article 5 which was previously mentioned. The above statement has not had an effect on policy in the United States because it hasn't been enforced. However, in 2011, Illinois became the 16th U.S. state to place a moratorium on the death penalty. With the new DNA technology, Governor George Ryan of Illinois declared this moratorium after this technology was used to prove that 13 people on death row were innocent.
This brings up the issue of morality. Is there truly any way to be 100% positive that the life being taken by an execution is in fact the same life that was responsible for the crime that have been convicted for? "Why do we kill people who have killed people to show killing people is wrong?"
Capital Punishment and the concern that it is unconstitutional is still a very present issue. The state of Texas is currently deciding whether a man named Scott Panetti (who was diagnosed with Schizophrenia 7 years before committing the crime) will be executed. His mental health is being reevaluated and then the court will make their decision.
An abolishment of the death penalty is not an unacheivable goal. Executions are currently funded by state taxes. As mentioned earlier, it costs much less to fund a life sentence than an execution. The abolition of capital punishment would need no further funding and would in fact save states money who still allow executions. The social contract between the citizens of the United States and the United States government is being violated by allowing the death penalty. The government is not protecting our rights therefore change is imperative.
As you can see, there are no benefits to the practice of capital punishment. It is unconstitutional, irrational, unethical, and should be abolished.
The death penalty does not abide by the 14th amendment. Capital punishment deprives all of those sentenced of their life. Blatantly violating the 14th amendment. It also violates the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. 32 of the 50 states practice capital punishment. Texas is #1 for sentencing the death penalty however, they are ranked 13 in violent crimes and 17 in murders per 100,00 people. This statistic demonstrates the very real issue that the severity of a crime that "should" be sentenced capital punishment varies from state to state. A crime in one state would be punishable by life in prison where that same crime in another state could be punishable by death. Therefore, capital punishment should be abolished because it clearly violates the 14th Amendment of the United States of America.
Lethal injection is, the most popular execution method but others such as electrocution, gas chamber, hanging, and even firing squad are still legal in some states. Lethal injection is the practice of injecting a person with a fatal dose of drugs for the express purpose of causing immediate death. Electrocution is death caused by electric shock. A gas chamber is an apparatus for killing humans or animals with gas, consisting of a sealed chamber into which a poisonous gas is introduced. Hanging is the suspension of a person by a noose around the neck. Execution by firing squad is execution by shooting. Pictures of each or located at the bottom of the "HOME" page. Who has the right to take another persons life? Those who support the death penalty, would you be able to push the button to initiate the electrocution of another human being? or inject the syringe into the arm of someone knowing that you are killing them? What human being should have the right to decide whether another lives or dies? Capital Punishment is a violation of the 8th amendment which defends citizens against cruel and unusual punishment. Some believe that the death penalty is a deterrent, an action meant to prevent or limit crimes that would be punishable by death, however, there is no evidence supporting that rates of violent crimes have decreased due to the threat of capital punishment. The death penalty is a violation of the 8th amendment of the United States and should be considered cruel and unusual punishment.
Another argument for the support of capital punishment is that it is more cost efficient to execute a prisoner than support them with a life sentence in jail without parole. This argument is very wrong. The average cost of an execution by lethal injection, the most commonly used method of execution, is $1.26 million dollars. Whereas the average cost of supporting a prisoner with a life sentence is about $49,000.
There are many commonly asked questions when it comes to capital punishment. Who is to decide who deserves to lose their like as opposed to a life sentence as a result of a crime that has been committed? Are minority groups discriminated against when it comes to the sentencing the death penalty? Where is the line distinguished?
It began in 1972 during the Furman v. Georgia case. It questioned whether the death penalty is inherently cruel and unusual punishment. Ultimately the court ruled that it is constitutional. However, they began to establish restrictions in later cases.
In 1977, Coker v. Georgia, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty is banned for prisoners who are convicted for raping women.
In 1986, Ford v. Wainwright, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty is banned for defendants who are diagnosed as mentally ill.
In 1987, McClesky . Kemp, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty against charges that violated the 14th Amendment because minority defendants were more likely to receive the death penalty than were white defendants.
In 2002, Atkins v. Virginia, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty is banned for all defendants under the age of 18.
Each case brought to the Supreme Court was used to establish restrictions but defended the constitutionality of capital punishment.
In 1985 the Supreme Court answered one of the most frequently asked questions: Where is the line drawn?
Tison v. Arizona: Gary Tison is convicted for armed robbery. While in prison, he befriends a man named Randy Greenwalt who was convicted for murder. Gary's two sons Raymond and Ricky went to visit their father in prison every Sunday. Gary convinces his sons who have no criminal records, to assist him and Randy in an escape from jail. They are successful. During their getaway Gary and Randy killed a confirmed 3 people; however, upon further investigation the men are suspected to have killed 6 people. When the police finally caught up with the group a gun fight broke out and Gary Tison was killed. Randy, Raymond, and Ricky were arrested and brought to trial for 3 murders, car theft, jail break, and more for a total of 92 charges. All 3 men were sentenced to the death penalty even though Ricky and Raymond did not commit the murders, they assisted the crimes. It was clear that Raymond and Ricky did not intend to kill however they did provide the murder weapons and it was determined that they made no effort to help the victims. The court decided that capital punishment is constitutional when the defendant shows a "reckless indifference to the value of human life." The Tison brothers appealed their case many times and it was decided that their sentence would be reduced to life in prison with no parole. Randy was executed in 1997.
"Reckless indifference to the value of human life."
According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights everyone has a right to life. In Article 5 of this document states: "no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment." Many countries including Hungary, South Africa, Lithuania, Ukraine, Albania, and the European Union abide by this statement and therefore do not practice capital punishment.
On April 20, 2005, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights called upon all states that still maintain the death penalty "to abolish the death penalty completely and in the meantime, to establish a moratorium on executions" due to the fact it violates the Article 5 which was previously mentioned. The above statement has not had an effect on policy in the United States because it hasn't been enforced. However, in 2011, Illinois became the 16th U.S. state to place a moratorium on the death penalty. With the new DNA technology, Governor George Ryan of Illinois declared this moratorium after this technology was used to prove that 13 people on death row were innocent.
This brings up the issue of morality. Is there truly any way to be 100% positive that the life being taken by an execution is in fact the same life that was responsible for the crime that have been convicted for? "Why do we kill people who have killed people to show killing people is wrong?"
Capital Punishment and the concern that it is unconstitutional is still a very present issue. The state of Texas is currently deciding whether a man named Scott Panetti (who was diagnosed with Schizophrenia 7 years before committing the crime) will be executed. His mental health is being reevaluated and then the court will make their decision.
An abolishment of the death penalty is not an unacheivable goal. Executions are currently funded by state taxes. As mentioned earlier, it costs much less to fund a life sentence than an execution. The abolition of capital punishment would need no further funding and would in fact save states money who still allow executions. The social contract between the citizens of the United States and the United States government is being violated by allowing the death penalty. The government is not protecting our rights therefore change is imperative.
As you can see, there are no benefits to the practice of capital punishment. It is unconstitutional, irrational, unethical, and should be abolished.