Argument

I believe that the death penalty is constitutional. The Supreme Court has maintained that the death penalty is not execessivly "cruel and unusual" in on itself. The highest court in the land states that the death penalty is constitutional. If it's the application is deemed "unusual" that the one on the death row will be resentenced properly, most likely life without parole. The U.S. legislature drew a more narrowly construed statutes that would satisfy the Court's misgivings. The Supreme Court has cited the 5th Amendment, which the Court strongly implies that the Framers did not intend to prevent the use of capital punishment. The 5th guarantees that nobody shall be deprived their rights of life, liberty or property, without due process law.The clear implication is that depriving someone of his or her life is permissible under the Constitution. In the many trials, cases, and rulings, capital punishment is not a form of "cruel and unusual" punishment under the 8th Amendment. Some claim that the death penalty takes away one's rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and that the death penalty should be deemed unconstitutional by such. Nevertheless, I say that the perpatrator commited of murder, he took away the victims rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In this case, such a punishment should be permissible and constitutional. "If men were angles, no government would be needed." - James Madison. As men are far from angles, government must intervene and bring justice to those who commit such atrocities against mankind. The death penalty is and will remain constitutional.

"ThisNation.com--Is the Death Penalty Constitutional?" ThisNation.com-American Government & Politics Online. 30 Nov. 2011. Web. 30 Nov. 2011. <http://www.thisnation.com/question/018.html>.

Is Henry Fleming a Hero?

• Attention-Getter
• Brief/Summary
• Thesis

• body