Death Penalty from 3 perspectives

 Perspective 1. murder victim's family who is against death penalty

HI, I am the mother of Julie Heath.

The last time anyone saw our daughter, Julie Heath alive was Oct. 3, 1993. She was 18-year-old and set out to visit her boyfriend in Hot Springs, Arkansas.

A week later, a hunter discovered Heath’s body, less than eight miles from where her broken-down car was found. She wore a black shirt, socks and underwear, but they were inside-out. Her black jeans were partially unzipped. Her throat was slashed.

Police later arrested Eric Randall Nance for Heath’s murder. Investigators said he picked her up near her vehicle, before DNA evidence proved he raped and killed her. In 1994, he was handed the death penalty. 

But even when executions take place, the pain of surviving family like us doesn’t disappear with the perpetrator’s pulse.

Death penalty advocates and politicians, including Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge, argue that when the state executes a person who has committed a terrible crime, the act brings closure to victim’s family. But it’s not that simple.

“The governor likes to say he does this because victims’ families deserve closure,

“Every time I hear that, I think, ‘you’re not doing it for me. It didn’t help me.’

We are against death penalty.

Perspective 2

Hi, we are supporters of death penalty.

Here are some reasons why we support the system. 

First of all, we think that serial murderers should deserve the equal amount of punishment.The murder criminal has to compensate the victim, therefore, If a person kills someone, they deserve to end their life as well. 

Secondly, death penalty contributes to decrease crime rates. It is a human psychological factor that if people are aware that such an extreme punishment exists, they feel afraid to commit serial crimes. It restrains public order from deteriorating.

Thirdly, It is cheaper to exeut people than put them in prison for life.

As we mentioned in the first place, if a person kills someone, they deserve the same punishment. Alongside, it costs more money to keep them in prison, 

Some of the tax money we pay goes to those criminals who don't even deserve to live.

Do you really think life sentences are better?

Perspective 3

Hi, we are the researchers of death penalty.

We are going to be answering some questions that general people ask about death penalty, and I want you to think about your opinion, whether you agree or disagree to the system. 

Doesn't the Death Penalty deter crime, especially murder? 

A: No, there is no credible evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than long terms of imprisonment. States that have death penalty laws do not have lower crime rates or murder rates than states without such laws. And states that have abolished capital punishment show no significant changes in either crime or murder rates.

The death penalty has no deterrent effect. Claims that each execution deters a certain number of murders have been thoroughly discredited by social science research. People commit murders largely in the heat of passion, under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or because they are mentally ill, giving little or no thought to the possible consequences of their acts. The few murderers who plan their crimes beforehand -- for example, professional executioners -- intend and expect to avoid punishment altogether by not getting caught. Some self-destructive individuals may even hope they will be caught and executed.

Death penalty laws falsely convince the public that government has taken effective measures to combat crime and homicide. In reality, such laws do nothing to protect us or our communities from the acts of dangerous criminals.

Q: Don't murderers deserve to die?

A: No one deserves to die. When the government metes out vengeance disguised as justice, it becomes complicit with killers in devaluing human life and human dignity. In civilized society, we reject the principle of literally doing to criminals what they do to their victims: The penalty for rape cannot be rape, or for arson, the burning down of the arsonist's house. We should not, therefore, punish the murderer with death.

Q: If execution is unacceptable, what is the alternative? 

A: Convicted murderers can be sentenced to life imprisonment, as they are in many countries and states that have abolished the death penalty. Most state laws allow life sentences for murder that severely limit or eliminate the possibility of parole. Today, 37 states allow juries to sentence defendants to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole instead of the death penalty.

Several recent studies of public attitudes about crime and punishment found that a majority of Americans support alternatives to capital punishment: When people were presented with the facts about several crimes for which death was a possible punishment, a majority chose life imprisonment without parole as an appropriate alternative to the death penalty.

Q Is it really cheaper and humane to execute people ?

A study done in California discovered that it was actually more expensive to execute a person than to keep them in jail for life. The amount of time and money spent on taking a person’s life is greater than keeping them in prison.

For those of us who think there is a humane way to execute, let’s reflect on how some executions actually occur.

Often prisoners are woken with no knowledge they are to be killed, taken to a remote location, tied to a post and shot in the chest. If they don’t die, a captain takes a pistol and shoots them in the head. For hangings, people are sometimes strapped to a steel board to stop them moving as they are wheeled up to a noose.

Governments often keep this information on executions secret, even to the point of loading some of the guns with blanks so no one definitively knows who in the firing squad fired the death blow.

Whichever way you look at it, killing another human isn’t humane, not even close. And when you get to the details it is simply vengeful and cruel.