Death Penalty & Victim Compensation
The death penalty remains one of the most contentious issues in the criminal justice system. What do you consider to be the most persuasive argument in favor of the death penalty? Conversely, what is the most compelling argument against it? Analyze how the courts attempt to balance these opposing viewpoints when making decisions about capital punishment. Discuss the ethical, legal, and practical considerations that influence court rulings, as well as the broader social and political context that shapes the debate over the death penalty. Be sure to include examples from the textbook in your answer.
Three (03) Paragraphs
Textbook Resource
Siegel;, Larry.2018.Corrections Today.Boston, MA:Cengage.
Great Advances For Victims
One of the great advances for victims connected to our criminal justice system involves attempts to make people victimized “whole” again to the best extent that we can. Provide a summary of things you find most important from your readings. Afterwards, consider the links below. The first takes you to a video that briefly discusses victim compensation programs. Using the video and any relevant information from your readings, what is good about such programs? What is bad? The second link takes you to information regarding Arkansas. What does it tell us about services Arkansas provides to victims?
Compensation
Securing Restitutions for Victims
-
What do you consider to be the most persuasive argument in favor of the death penalty?,
-
Conversely what is the most compelling argument against it?,
-
Analyze how the courts attempt to balance these opposing viewpoints when making decisions about capital punishment.,
-
Discuss the ethical legal and practical considerations that influence court rulings as well as the broader social and political context that shapes the debate over the death penalty.,
-
Be sure to include examples from the textbook in your answer.
Death Penalty Analysis — Three Paragraphs
One of the most persuasive arguments in favor of the death penalty is deterrence and retributive justice. Supporters argue that the most violent and irredeemable offenders—such as those who commit serial murders or extreme acts of brutality—should face the highest possible punishment. They claim that execution protects society by ensuring that such individuals never reoffend and may discourage others from committing similar crimes. Larry Siegel (2018) notes that corrections and punishment historically included incapacitation as a core goal; capital punishment represents the ultimate form of incapacitation as it permanently removes dangerous individuals from society. Proponents often frame the death penalty as a morally justified response to severe harm, delivering closure or symbolic justice for victims and their families.
The most compelling argument against the death penalty is the risk of wrongful conviction and disproportionate application. Opponents contend that once an innocent person is executed, the mistake is irreversible, making errors intolerable within a fair justice system. Siegel (2018) also emphasizes systemic inequities in corrections and sentencing, noting how punishment may be influenced by socioeconomic background, race, and access to legal representation. The death penalty often reflects these disparities, with marginalized groups more likely to receive capital punishment. Additionally, critics argue that the death penalty does not reliably deter crime and that life without parole can protect society while avoiding the moral harm of state-sanctioned killing.