Additional Resources
Delcour, Julie. "The Cost of the Death Penalty Outweighs Its Benefits to Society." The Death Penalty. Ed. Jenny Cromie and Lynn M. Zott. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "Capital Punishment a Costly Option." www.tulsaworld.com 4 Sept. 2011. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 29 Sept. 2015.
Delcour text argues that the death penalty is the most expensive, financially impractical punishment for convicted murderers. Delcour points out that no one can dispute the high cost of the death penalty. Delcour speaks about the high cost of the death penalty system makes little sense when state budgets are slim and cutbacks are the norm—especially when so many law enforcement officials consider it an ineffective deterrent against homicides and the least efficient use of taxpayer dollars. I find this text to be an informed assessment on the cost od capital punishment. For my Argument of Inquiry paper, I plan to talk about how impractical the death penalty can be because of the high cost associated with it.
Jost, Kenneth. "Death Penalty Debates." CQ Researcher 19 Nov. 2010: 965-88. Web. 29 Sept. 2015.
In this report, Jost talks about the death penalty debate in whole. He speaks on how public support for capital punishment in the United States remains strong on paper, but opponents say it is weakening in practice. He speaks on statistics and how the number of executions has fallen. Opponents of the death penalty say prosecutors may be seeking the death penalty less often because of the costs of a capital trial, sentencing and post-conviction proceedings. Jurors may also be worried about the costs of the system, the delay between sentence and execution and the risk of executing an innocent person. On the other had, supporters of capital punishment counter that the costs and delays result primarily from obstructionism by death penalty lawyers and that the risk of a wrongful execution is all but nonexistent. This text is very good assessment of the death penalty debate. It is very informative and level headed. It touched base on both the pro and co of the death penalty. For my Argument of Inquiry paper, I plan to talk about the debate as a whole – why some people are for capital punishment and why others are against it.
Keane, Michael. "The Ethical “Elephant” In The Death Penalty “Room.” "American Journal Of Bioethics 8.10 (2008): 45-50. Academic Search Complete. Web. 29 Sept. 2015.
In this article, Keane explores the harm that occurs to murder victims' relatives when an execution is delayed or indefinitely postponed. Keane explains how physician opposition to capital punishment may be contributing to significant harm. Keane does this by explaining how the use of established principles in psychiatry and the science of the brain, it is shown that victims' relatives can suffer brain damage when justice is not done. Conversely, adequate justice can reverse some of those changes in the brain. I find this text an informative and levelheaded approach on both the pro and con of the death penalty. Keane explores both sides when it come to physicians and the affects on murder victims. For my Argument of Inquiry paper, I plan to talk about how this issue can relate to both a pro and con choice of the death penalty and give an insight on both views.
Lynch, Mona. "Capital Punishment As Moral Imperative: Pro-Death-Penalty Discourse On The Internet." Punishment & Society 4.2 (2002): 213. Academic Search Complete. Web. 29 Sept. 2015.
In this article, Lynch explores one venue among pro-death penalty communications on the Internet. Lynch examines these messages because they seem to reveal the affective, symbolic nature of popular support for capital punishment in the United States. In Lynch’s text she suggest that the death penalty becomes an unproblematic, but rather, preferred method and symbol of justice. I find Lynch’s text to be somewhat biased in the sense that she throws in her own opinions, however the text is still very scholarly and Lynch goes in depth on why people are pro-death penalty. For my Argument of Inquiry paper, I plan to talk about what the benefits/ why people are pro-death penalty in the United States.
Radelet, Michael L., and Marian J. Borg. "The Changing Nature Of Death Penalty Debates." Annual Review Of Sociology 26.(2000): 43. Academic Search Complete. Web. 29 Sept. 2015.
In this paper, Radelet and Marian examine the changing nature of death penalty arguments. They cover six specific areas: deterrence, incapacitation, caprice and bias, cost, innocence, and retribution. Recent changes in public opinion regarding the death penalty, both authors review the findings of social science research pertinent to each of these issues. Their analysis suggests that social science scholarship is changing the way Americans debate the death penalty. Particularly when viewed within a historical and worldwide context, these changes suggest a gradual movement toward the eventual abolition of capital punishment in America. This text seems to be more guided towards why the death penalty should be abolished and both authors show in detail how the media and research about the topic is leading America to a gradual movement toward the abolishment of the death penalty. For my Argument of Inquiry paper, I will be able to take a stance as to why other then the cost (Delcour’s text) the death penalty is bad and why it should be abolished.
Delcour text argues that the death penalty is the most expensive, financially impractical punishment for convicted murderers. Delcour points out that no one can dispute the high cost of the death penalty. Delcour speaks about the high cost of the death penalty system makes little sense when state budgets are slim and cutbacks are the norm—especially when so many law enforcement officials consider it an ineffective deterrent against homicides and the least efficient use of taxpayer dollars. I find this text to be an informed assessment on the cost od capital punishment. For my Argument of Inquiry paper, I plan to talk about how impractical the death penalty can be because of the high cost associated with it.
Jost, Kenneth. "Death Penalty Debates." CQ Researcher 19 Nov. 2010: 965-88. Web. 29 Sept. 2015.
In this report, Jost talks about the death penalty debate in whole. He speaks on how public support for capital punishment in the United States remains strong on paper, but opponents say it is weakening in practice. He speaks on statistics and how the number of executions has fallen. Opponents of the death penalty say prosecutors may be seeking the death penalty less often because of the costs of a capital trial, sentencing and post-conviction proceedings. Jurors may also be worried about the costs of the system, the delay between sentence and execution and the risk of executing an innocent person. On the other had, supporters of capital punishment counter that the costs and delays result primarily from obstructionism by death penalty lawyers and that the risk of a wrongful execution is all but nonexistent. This text is very good assessment of the death penalty debate. It is very informative and level headed. It touched base on both the pro and co of the death penalty. For my Argument of Inquiry paper, I plan to talk about the debate as a whole – why some people are for capital punishment and why others are against it.
Keane, Michael. "The Ethical “Elephant” In The Death Penalty “Room.” "American Journal Of Bioethics 8.10 (2008): 45-50. Academic Search Complete. Web. 29 Sept. 2015.
In this article, Keane explores the harm that occurs to murder victims' relatives when an execution is delayed or indefinitely postponed. Keane explains how physician opposition to capital punishment may be contributing to significant harm. Keane does this by explaining how the use of established principles in psychiatry and the science of the brain, it is shown that victims' relatives can suffer brain damage when justice is not done. Conversely, adequate justice can reverse some of those changes in the brain. I find this text an informative and levelheaded approach on both the pro and con of the death penalty. Keane explores both sides when it come to physicians and the affects on murder victims. For my Argument of Inquiry paper, I plan to talk about how this issue can relate to both a pro and con choice of the death penalty and give an insight on both views.
Lynch, Mona. "Capital Punishment As Moral Imperative: Pro-Death-Penalty Discourse On The Internet." Punishment & Society 4.2 (2002): 213. Academic Search Complete. Web. 29 Sept. 2015.
In this article, Lynch explores one venue among pro-death penalty communications on the Internet. Lynch examines these messages because they seem to reveal the affective, symbolic nature of popular support for capital punishment in the United States. In Lynch’s text she suggest that the death penalty becomes an unproblematic, but rather, preferred method and symbol of justice. I find Lynch’s text to be somewhat biased in the sense that she throws in her own opinions, however the text is still very scholarly and Lynch goes in depth on why people are pro-death penalty. For my Argument of Inquiry paper, I plan to talk about what the benefits/ why people are pro-death penalty in the United States.
Radelet, Michael L., and Marian J. Borg. "The Changing Nature Of Death Penalty Debates." Annual Review Of Sociology 26.(2000): 43. Academic Search Complete. Web. 29 Sept. 2015.
In this paper, Radelet and Marian examine the changing nature of death penalty arguments. They cover six specific areas: deterrence, incapacitation, caprice and bias, cost, innocence, and retribution. Recent changes in public opinion regarding the death penalty, both authors review the findings of social science research pertinent to each of these issues. Their analysis suggests that social science scholarship is changing the way Americans debate the death penalty. Particularly when viewed within a historical and worldwide context, these changes suggest a gradual movement toward the eventual abolition of capital punishment in America. This text seems to be more guided towards why the death penalty should be abolished and both authors show in detail how the media and research about the topic is leading America to a gradual movement toward the abolishment of the death penalty. For my Argument of Inquiry paper, I will be able to take a stance as to why other then the cost (Delcour’s text) the death penalty is bad and why it should be abolished.