-->

Monday, May 16, 2011

Should Capital Punishment be Re-introduced in Britain?

If you order your research paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Should Capital Punishment be Re-introduced in Britain?. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Should Capital Punishment be Re-introduced in Britain? paper right on time.

Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Should Capital Punishment be Re-introduced in Britain?, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Should Capital Punishment be Re-introduced in Britain? paper at affordable prices with livepaperhelp.com!



Capital Punishment is the use of death as punishment. In the 18th century Parliament was continuously enlarging the list of capital crimes, which were punishable by death, these included stealing in a shop to the value of five shillings, stealing anything at all privily from a person, sending threatening letters, sacrilege, and cutting down a tree. Starting in the 180s, the number of capital crimes slowly decreased. In 1861, murder became the only offence for which the death penalty was used in peacetime.


On 1th July 155 Ruth Ellis was hanged at Holloway Prison, London. Her execution aroused the public interest and sympathy. There was nothing solemn or chastening about her death. It was mainly this execution that sparked off a new wave of controversy that led to hangings being suspended in Britain for almost two years and an important legislative step being taken towards no capital punishment.


The 157 Homicide Act dramatically reduced the number of executions- In the first 6 years of the 150s there was 87 hangings, about 15 a year, in the 8 years from 157 to 164 there were , less than 4 a year. In 16 and 164 there was just one double execution each year. In 165 executions were suspended for five years, then was totally abolished in 170.


How many people have to be murdered before the death penalty is restored? Murderers take people’s lives and some of these lives belonged to innocent children upon whom parents will never again look. When caught and convicted murderers are allowed to live in prison and are fed and clothed at public expense. Is it not time that these people who murder were given a lethal injection or hanged?


Order custom research paper on Should Capital Punishment be Re-introduced in Britain?


Capital punishment could be justified if it prevented the criminal from repeating his crime, or if it deters crimes by discouraging would-be offenders. Both of these would contribute to a greater happiness in society. As a fundamental matter of justice, criminals deserve punishment, some people think that the punishment should be equal to the harm done. Punishment equal to the harm done is commonly expressed in the saying “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” Life imprisonment for murder would therefore not be sufficient punishment.


Is the death penalty a deterrent to crimes? Almost three-quarters of murders involve victims and suspects who are acquainted with each other, often within a family. The deterrence argument states that it is necessary to kill an offender to dissuade other people from committing the same kind of crime. At least half of all homicides result from a quarrel, revenge, or loss of temper. Murders are most often committed in moments of passion when extreme emotion overcomes reason. They may also be committed under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or in moments of panic. Some people who commit violent crimes are highly unstable or mentally ill.


Those who favour the return of the death penalty often argue that the rise in homicides can be directly attributed to the abolition of the death penalty in 165. However, rising crime has been a general phenomenon since the 160s. Homicide rates have increased far less than other violent crimes for which the death penalty was not imposed. The evidence indicates that murder rates are not affected by the penalties, but fluctuate according to the complex social, political and personal factors that vary with each case of murder. It is incorrect to assume that all, or most, of those who commit such serious crimes as murder do so after rationally calculating the consequences. No one can know what is in a person’s mind; no one can ever understand what moves a person to do, or not to do a certain thing.


Would a return to the death penalty undermine us? A return to the death penalty would undermine the principle of the sanctity of human life, on which our laws should be based.


Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in every country and under any circumstances. Amnesty believes that the death penalty is a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, unusual or degrading punishment, as proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They believe it is social aggression masquerading as morality. The death penalty is irreversible, if someone is executed, then is later found to be innocent, there is no way of bringing them back. Even if the chances of wrongful conviction are very small, we could still commit an unpardonable error we could take the life of an innocent person.


I do not think that capital punishment should be re-introduced in Britain. Evidence suggests that the death penalty is not a deterrent to capital crimes. Executing a murderer may help the victim’s relatives feel better at the time, but later on the murderer’s punishment will be over, because he will no longer be alive, but the victim’s family will still be hurting. If the death penalty were re-introduced there would be a chance of killing an innocent person. The death penalty does not stop any crimes from happening.


Capital Punishment is the use of death as punishment. In the 18th century Parliament was continuously enlarging the list of capital crimes, which were punishable by death, these included stealing in a shop to the value of five shillings, stealing anything at all privily from a person, sending threatening letters, sacrilege, and cutting down a tree. Starting in the 180s, the number of capital crimes slowly decreased. In 1861, murder became the only offence for which the death penalty was used in peacetime.


On 1th July 155 Ruth Ellis was hanged at Holloway Prison, London. Her execution aroused the public interest and sympathy. There was nothing solemn or chastening about her death. It was mainly this execution that sparked off a new wave of controversy that led to hangings being suspended in Britain for almost two years and an important legislative step being taken towards no capital punishment.


The 157 Homicide Act dramatically reduced the number of executions- In the first 6 years of the 150s there was 87 hangings, about 15 a year, in the 8 years from 157 to 164 there were , less than 4 a year. In 16 and 164 there was just one double execution each year. In 165 executions were suspended for five years, then was totally abolished in 170.


How many people have to be murdered before the death penalty is restored? Murderers take people’s lives and some of these lives belonged to innocent children upon whom parents will never again look. When caught and convicted murderers are allowed to live in prison and are fed and clothed at public expense. Is it not time that these people who murder were given a lethal injection or hanged?


Capital punishment could be justified if it prevented the criminal from repeating his crime, or if it deters crimes by discouraging would-be offenders. Both of these would contribute to a greater happiness in society. As a fundamental matter of justice, criminals deserve punishment, some people think that the punishment should be equal to the harm done. Punishment equal to the harm done is commonly expressed in the saying “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” Life imprisonment for murder would therefore not be sufficient punishment.


Is the death penalty a deterrent to crimes? Almost three-quarters of murders involve victims and suspects who are acquainted with each other, often within a family. The deterrence argument states that it is necessary to kill an offender to dissuade other people from committing the same kind of crime. At least half of all homicides result from a quarrel, revenge, or loss of temper. Murders are most often committed in moments of passion when extreme emotion overcomes reason. They may also be committed under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or in moments of panic. Some people who commit violent crimes are highly unstable or mentally ill.


Those who favour the return of the death penalty often argue that the rise in homicides can be directly attributed to the abolition of the death penalty in 165. However, rising crime has been a general phenomenon since the 160s. Homicide rates have increased far less than other violent crimes for which the death penalty was not imposed. The evidence indicates that murder rates are not affected by the penalties, but fluctuate according to the complex social, political and personal factors that vary with each case of murder. It is incorrect to assume that all, or most, of those who commit such serious crimes as murder do so after rationally calculating the consequences. No one can know what is in a person’s mind; no one can ever understand what moves a person to do, or not to do a certain thing.


Would a return to the death penalty undermine us? A return to the death penalty would undermine the principle of the sanctity of human life, on which our laws should be based.


Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in every country and under any circumstances. Amnesty believes that the death penalty is a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, unusual or degrading punishment, as proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They believe it is social aggression masquerading as morality. The death penalty is irreversible, if someone is executed, then is later found to be innocent, there is no way of bringing them back. Even if the chances of wrongful conviction are very small, we could still commit an unpardonable error we could take the life of an innocent person.


I do not think that capital punishment should be re-introduced in Britain. Evidence suggests that the death penalty is not a deterrent to capital crimes. Executing a murderer may help the victim’s relatives feel better at the time, but later on the murderer’s punishment will be over, because he will no longer be alive, but the victim’s family will still be hurting. If the death penalty were re-introduced there would be a chance of killing an innocent person. The death penalty does not stop any crimes from happening.


Capital Punishment is the use of death as punishment. In the 18th century Parliament was continuously enlarging the list of capital crimes, which were punishable by death, these included stealing in a shop to the value of five shillings, stealing anything at all privily from a person, sending threatening letters, sacrilege, and cutting down a tree. Starting in the 180s, the number of capital crimes slowly decreased. In 1861, murder became the only offence for which the death penalty was used in peacetime.


On 1th July 155 Ruth Ellis was hanged at Holloway Prison, London. Her execution aroused the public interest and sympathy. There was nothing solemn or chastening about her death. It was mainly this execution that sparked off a new wave of controversy that led to hangings being suspended in Britain for almost two years and an important legislative step being taken towards no capital punishment.


The 157 Homicide Act dramatically reduced the number of executions- In the first 6 years of the 150s there was 87 hangings, about 15 a year, in the 8 years from 157 to 164 there were , less than 4 a year. In 16 and 164 there was just one double execution each year. In 165 executions were suspended for five years, then was totally abolished in 170.


How many people have to be murdered before the death penalty is restored? Murderers take people’s lives and some of these lives belonged to innocent children upon whom parents will never again look. When caught and convicted murderers are allowed to live in prison and are fed and clothed at public expense. Is it not time that these people who murder were given a lethal injection or hanged?


Capital punishment could be justified if it prevented the criminal from repeating his crime, or if it deters crimes by discouraging would-be offenders. Both of these would contribute to a greater happiness in society. As a fundamental matter of justice, criminals deserve punishment, some people think that the punishment should be equal to the harm done. Punishment equal to the harm done is commonly expressed in the saying “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” Life imprisonment for murder would therefore not be sufficient punishment.


Is the death penalty a deterrent to crimes? Almost three-quarters of murders involve victims and suspects who are acquainted with each other, often within a family. The deterrence argument states that it is necessary to kill an offender to dissuade other people from committing the same kind of crime. At least half of all homicides result from a quarrel, revenge, or loss of temper. Murders are most often committed in moments of passion when extreme emotion overcomes reason. They may also be committed under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or in moments of panic. Some people who commit violent crimes are highly unstable or mentally ill.


Those who favour the return of the death penalty often argue that the rise in homicides can be directly attributed to the abolition of the death penalty in 165. However, rising crime has been a general phenomenon since the 160s. Homicide rates have increased far less than other violent crimes for which the death penalty was not imposed. The evidence indicates that murder rates are not affected by the penalties, but fluctuate according to the complex social, political and personal factors that vary with each case of murder. It is incorrect to assume that all, or most, of those who commit such serious crimes as murder do so after rationally calculating the consequences. No one can know what is in a person’s mind; no one can ever understand what moves a person to do, or not to do a certain thing.


Would a return to the death penalty undermine us? A return to the death penalty would undermine the principle of the sanctity of human life, on which our laws should be based.


Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in every country and under any circumstances. Amnesty believes that the death penalty is a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, unusual or degrading punishment, as proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They believe it is social aggression masquerading as morality. The death penalty is irreversible, if someone is executed, then is later found to be innocent, there is no way of bringing them back. Even if the chances of wrongful conviction are very small, we could still commit an unpardonable error we could take the life of an innocent person.


I do not think that capital punishment should be re-introduced in Britain. Evidence suggests that the death penalty is not a deterrent to capital crimes. Executing a murderer may help the victim’s relatives feel better at the time, but later on the murderer’s punishment will be over, because he will no longer be alive, but the victim’s family will still be hurting. If the death penalty were re-introduced there would be a chance of killing an innocent person. The death penalty does not stop any crimes from happening.





Please note that this sample paper on Should Capital Punishment be Re-introduced in Britain? is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Should Capital Punishment be Re-introduced in Britain?, we are here to assist you. Your persuasive essay on Should Capital Punishment be Re-introduced in Britain? will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.

Order your authentic assignment from livepaperhelp.com and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!



0 comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.