Death Penalty

Law Offices - Death Penalty

Good afternoon. Yesterday, I discovered Law Offices - Death Penalty. Which could be very helpful in my opinion therefore you. Death Penalty

I am not a supporter of the death penalty and never have been. But I would admit that if one of my loved ones was brutally murdered, I'm sure that I would initially love to send whoever ever committed this heinous crime to anyone eternal resting place our originator has for him - the worse the better. I can only dream the feelings citizen have when they have lost person they love to that kind of violent brutality. That being said, in our country and in our legal principles we don't allow our emotions to rule the day. In the regards to the death penalty, it truly needs to be looked at in a more objective sense.

What I said. It isn't the conclusion that the real about Law Offices. You read this article for info on what you want to know is Law Offices.

Law Offices

I am going to make the case that, while I object to the death penalty on moral grounds, I don't feel that this is probably the best way to argue for getting rid of it. What we should focus on is the impractical and inefficient manner that executions are administered in this country. If you allow common sense and good judgment to prevail, I think most individuals would perceive that keeping the death penalty alive (pardon the pun) is not in the best interests of our society. Here are some surmise why:

1. Cost to the taxpayer

* A 2003 legislative audit in Kansas found that the estimated cost of a death penalty case was 70% more than the cost of a comparable non-death penalty case. Death penalty case costs were counted through to performance (median cost .26 million). Non-death penalty case costs were counted through to the end of incarceration (median cost 0,000). (December 2003 scrutinize by the Kansas Legislative Post Audit)
* In Tennessee, death penalty trials cost an average of 48% more than the average cost of trials in which prosecutors seek life imprisonment. (2004 report from Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury Office of Research)
* In Maryland death penalty cases cost 3 times more than non-death penalty cases, or million for a particular case. (Urban Institute, The Cost of the Death Penalty in Maryland, March 2008)
* In California the current principles costs 7 million per year; it would cost .5 million for a principles without the death penalty. (California Commission for the Fair supervision of Justice, July 2008)

People are also under the misconception that most of these costs are post-trial expenses - costs connected with legal proceedings after person has been convicted and sentenced to death. In reality, the majority of the excess expenditures occur before and while the trial. Even if you could eliminate all the post trial costs, seeking the death penalty would still be considerably more expensive than other alternative sentences. Given the fact that federal, state, and local budgets are already a financial nightmare, this is one area where states could cut a primary number of charge out of their budgets.

2. Death penalty does not deter the crime

This one is quite simple. There is no statistical evidence, everywhere that I am aware of, that shows that the death penalty deters crime. Most of what I have seen shows there is no correlation whatsoever. In fact, some states that are executing citizen have higher rates of murder than states that don't. In all honesty, I think there are other factors that explicate this phenomenon, but the point is, the institution of the death penalty has no result on the rates of homicide.

3. The death penalty is arbitrarily applied

According to Amnesty International:

* Ninety-five percent of death row inmates cannot afford their own attorney. Court-appointed attorneys often lack the touch primary for capital trials and are overworked and underpaid. In the most ultimate cases, some have slept through parts of trials or have arrived under the work on of drugs and/or alcohol.
* Prosecutors seek the death penalty far more oftentimes when the victim of a homicide is white than when the victim is African-American or of someone else ethnic/racial origin.
* Co-defendants charged with committing the same crime often receive separate punishments, where one defendant may receive a death sentence while someone else receives prison time.
* practically two percent of those convicted of crimes that make them eligible indeed receive a death sentence.
* Each prosecutor decides either or not to seek the death penalty. Local politics, the location of the crime, plea bargaining, and pure chance work on the process and make it a lottery of who lives and who dies.
* Geographic Arbitrariness: Since the U.S. Consummate Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976, 80% of all executions have taken place in the South. The Northeast accounts for less than 2% of executions.

The moral and heart felt arguments both for and against the death penalty will always be there. I don't think that there is much that will turn the minds of citizen who have strong feelings one way or the other. I think the great discussion for ending the lies, more simply, in the data driven diagnosis that accurately shows that it isn't effective. It doesn't stop murders, it's horribly expensive, and it is not fairly administered. It is time that we start pouring this huge number of wasted time, energy, and money into other areas of law enforcement, where the money would be of much great use and accomplish some measurable results.

I hope you receive new knowledge about Law Offices. Where you can put to use within your everyday life. And most importantly, your reaction is passed about Law Offices.