Summary

Granadillo 1

Granadillo 4

María Fernanda Granadillo Pretty good! B 42

Professor David Manning

SYG2323.0M1

19 February 2022

María Fernanda Granadillo

Professor David Manning

SYG2323.0M1

19 February 2022

-Content: this should be a single spaced header. -1

-Citations: a few places could use in text citations to give credit to Radelet and Brog (2000) for definitions, stats, dates and findings. All quotes need a page number and make sure you only have one period and its after the in text citation (Radelet, & Borg, 2000, p. 1). -4

-Theory: needed to state Radelet and Borg (2000) didn’t apply a specific theory while they did explore several hypothesis or arguments. -2

-Methodology: While you mention second data you should have show a few examples and said Radelet and Borg (2000) use others research as part of their secondary data analysis. -2

The changing nature of death penalty debates.

The authors of this research investigate how well the death sentence debate in the United States had evolved over the previous years. Researchers look into six significant matters: deterrence, incapacity, capriciousness, prejudice, cost innocent, and retribution, as well as how general views have changed on such topics. They contend that social research has influenced Americans' attitudes regarding the death penalty and also that the country is headed toward the eradication of the death sentence. The writers examine the background of death penalty legislation in the United States as well as how "all but a few death penalty statutes in the United States were found illegal in a momentous 1972 decision by the US Supreme Court."no period this side of the citation (Radelet & Borg, 2000, p. #). A few years later, the High Court shifted its stance on eradication by upholding several freshly adopted capital provisions. By 1999, "around 3500 men and 50 women were on death row in 38 states and two federal authorities (Radelet, & Borg, year, p. #)." The author discusses how public opinion on the death sentence has shifted since its reinstatement in 1976.

Whereas most Americans believe in the death penalty, the latest research suggests that such support has waned slightly. "In the early 1970s, general deterrence was the most compelling argument in support of the death sentence"(Radelet & Borg, 2000, p. #). According to the writers, the death sentence does not deter people from actually repeating similar crimes (names, year). Researchers show how deterrence research has attempted to embrace the theory that the death penalty is far more appropriate than long-term incarceration in deterring criminal killings. Another argument advanced by proponents of the death penalty in recent years is "the incapacitation hypothesis," which contends that "we need to execute the most horrific offenders to deter them from murdering again" (Radelet & Borg, 2000, p. #). The researchers explain how recent studies had discovered that persons on the death penalty acclimatize easier to jail and, if freed, have reduced odds of committing the crime again.

The writers claim that new research has changed the way the entire community thinks and that if granted the choice, the majority of the people would prefer life in prison without the possibility of release over the death sentence. Whereas proponents of the death sentence believed that it can be imposed without class and race inequities, research undertaken over the years has revealed that racial and class discrepancies exist not in isolated incidents, but many. According to Radelet and Borg (2000), "although most Americans understand the problem of racial and class inequality, they do not consider such discrimination a cause to oppose the death sentence (p. #)." Another aspect whereby the death sentence debate has evolved is in terms of the financial cost. It was formerly assumed that it was less expensive to execute an offender than to sustain him for the remainder of his life. According to research, the death sentence system is several times more expensive than the punishment of life in prison without the possibility of release (names, year). They also cover the expenditures of the trial as well as the protracted appeals required before an execution can be carried out" (Radelet & Borg, 2000, p. #). "Death penalty supporters now agree that as long as the death sentence is used, innocent defendants will be killed on occasion" (Radelet & Borg, 2000, p. #). This is another debate that has evolved during the previous years. Previously, proponents of the death sentence believed that such situations were unusual and unlikely to occur.

Today, the debate is not about whether this occurs or not, but rather whether the advantages of the death sentence exceed the probability of this mistake. According to the writers, vengeance is "the most crucial current pro-death penalty rationale" (Radelet & Borg, 2000, p. #).

According to Radelet and Borg (year) this viewpoint, people who commit very heinous crimes, such as murder, should be punished simply cause they deserve it; life without parole is simply not sufficient. Those who advocate the death sentence have frequently used this excuse to justify it. Opponents of the death penalty claim that it provides far less benefit to the victims’ families than it seems. The writers explore how research has demonstrated that life in jail, particularly life on death row, is worse than execution. Researchers claim that because it is hard to compute how much of any particular penalty an offender deserves, this option becomes "more of a moral dilemma and less of a criminological question" (Radelet & Borg, 2000). The writers analyze the increasing global trend for the elimination of the death penalty. Past in the United States demonstrates a growing abandonment of the death sentence. The researchers argued that perhaps the conventional death sentence discussion in the United States has changed in the previous years, and that thorough social current studies have influenced this development. A summary of the latest scientific studies and their importance is provided. They imply that the death sentence is being phased out in the United States.

This document has successfully delivered the issue of the death penalty. Radelet and Borg (year) have been able to use a secondary source of data to conduct the research where they have examined different researches that have been conducted in the past and relate with the topic discussed. By the use of past research, the authors have been able to acquire some facts and except figures to justify the research. To make the research more effective Radelet and Borg (year) considered both the group of researchers who are opposing the death penalty as well as those who are supporting the sentencing. This has made the article not to be biased by looking at one side of the issue.

References

Radelet, M. L., & Borg, M. J. (2000). The changing nature of death penalty debates. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 43-61. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.43