The Guillotine and Capital Punishment

11/4/2020

During the Reign of Terror of the French Revolution, 300,000 people were arrested. Of those people, 17,000 were executed by the Guillotine. Many of those who were executed were victims of mistaken identity, or were falsely accused by their neighbors.
Today, over 30 states in the U.S. (including the military and federal government) have the Death Penalty, or Capital Punishment as part of their State Laws. Since 1976, there have been over 1,200 executions in America.
Do you believe the Death Penalty should still exist? Why, or why not? Consider possible innocent victims and consider mass murderers. Give your reasons for or against Capital punishment.

20 Comments

Queenie Wu P2

10/24/2018 08:15:37 pm

The Death Penalty shouldn't exist because it's inhumane, even to those who committed the worse crimes possible. To the criminals who may deserve it or not, it's still not right and isn't fair to those who could possibly be innocent. There should be a different approach to take care of those who committed serious crimes, because mistakes could be made and an innocent life could be taken away because of that. The government is capable of making mistakes, which shouldn't be the reason as to why an innocent life gets taken away. The death penalty would just make more space in prisons for others to spend their time, which is pointless because in the end, death penalty or not, their lives are already taken away. Therefore, the death penalty shouldn't exist and a different approach should be taken in replace of that.

Melissa Chea (Period 3)

10/25/2018 11:13:13 pm

The topic of the death penalty is one of the largest debates that we will ever come to face in the world. There have always been punishments that seem too harsh even for some of the most dangerous criminals. For example, our death penalty is much like the guillotine during the French Revolution. Although I believe that it is important that people are punished for there criminal acts, punishment by death is a very cruel choice. The death penalty has been seen by many as a form of revenge to the criminals inflicted by the victims. Although these victims of very serious crimes should be able to achieve closure, revenge is not the right way to do so. The death penalty is permanent, meaning that there is no going back for the wrongfully accused or the mentally disabled. Statistics have shown that the death penalty is often aimed towards those who are poor or even to people of color. This just proves that the death penalty, or Capital Punishment should not be legal.

Amanda Cervantes

11/4/2020 03:02:46 pm

when it comes to bringing justice, the "Death penalty" isn't always the best choice, it is simple just out of the question. Death penalties(the punishment of execution, administered to someone legally convicted of a capital crime.) do not address the root causes of crime, Our main focus should and need's to be on preventing crime and violence. We know that to reduce crime and violence we must focus on the main source of the crime. Crime commonly happen's when other issues are neglected such as mental health, housing, access to education and sustainable employment options. When these issues are addressed, communities and our nation forward by addressing the main source as well as the root cause of these crimes, to create, strong, healthy families and our communities. Even most law enforcement officials agree that the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime. Perpetrators rarely consider the consequences when they engage in violence, if they did they wouldn't commit crimes in the first place. The few people who think about the consequences also think they won't get caught, so the death penalty isn't a factor.The death penalty has no affect nor impact in reducing crime.Not to mention most of the people who were executed or sentenced to the death penalty in the 1900's during "The Region of Terror", were just poor innocent people, who were wrongly accused of a crime that they had no part in. Killing people who were innocent is just flat out wrong, and to believe that over 17,000 out of the 300,000 people were brutally executed, stripped away from their life, what makes the horrific event even worse. Was how many of those who were executed were victims of mistaken identity and were even falsely accused by their own fellow neighbor's.I strongly oppose the death penalty, everyone deserves a fair trail and should not be sentenced with out a respected and fair trial. Those shall not be sentenced until proven guilty.

Megan Liu

11/5/2020 10:26:52 am

The death penalty should not exist. It is cruel and inhumane, even to criminals that have done horrible things. The death penalty is irreversible, so if an innocent person was executed, they died for nothing and will most likely never get justice. Death penalty is also relatively pointless, as crime and murder rates don't decrease much. The worlds' focus should be to prevent crime, but using death penalty doesnt have much of an effect.

SERINA LI link

11/5/2020 11:05:51 am

Although a death penalty is a swift painless death I don't think it should be allowed. I know it happens in a blink of an eye but it's doesn't speak justice to the victims or innocence. In that picture above shows a man decapitated and humiliated even after death. We don't know if that man was ever at fault but being humiliated like that shows no respect. Crimals or not you have to respect them. Torture devices also shouldn't be allowed when dealing with crimals. It's not right and they don't learn anything from it except more violence and hatred. Death penalty isn't always about justice. Revenge is another way to put it. Your not changing the person for the better good, but putting them in an environment that makes them more aggressive. Ending their lives isn't always a good thing because they may have ties with many other people to avenge them. So I don't think the death penalty should exist because it just makes matter worse.

Jayden Sandoval

11/5/2020 11:33:31 am

In my opinion I feel like the death penalty shouldn't even exist. The reason being said is because it is the worst thing that you can possibly do to any type of person as well as you are killing people who never even done something bad in life as you are killing them for no reason. It's even worst that ,"Since 1976, there have been over 1,200 executions in America." This shouldn't even be a thing killing 1.2k people.As well as," Of those people, 17,000 were executed by the Guillotine." As if this is out of 300,000 people.

Iliana Encinares (Period 1)

11/5/2020 02:00:31 pm

I believe that death penalty shouldn't exist, even in times of harsh and violent crimes. For example, in times of a peaceful protest people are just using their freedom of speech, and aren't harming any people who are there. However if you take into consideration a serial killer, then your feelings toward the subject could be heavily altered. A man or a woman who has taken the lives of so many people may seem to deserve death right? Wrong. Think about in terms of war. Soldiers take the lives of others during war time, as it is inevitable if you want to survive a time where you may suffer from pure terror. However, if they were to kill someone (or many people) that would be purely intentional. So if we are going strictly based on people who have taken the lives of others than that isn't justified either. Giving someone a death penalty is also both inhumane and risky. This is due to the fact that even though they had committed a crime you are still taking a person's life. Furthermore the point of arresting a person and putting them in prison is for both punishment and rehabilitation. If we were to focus strictly based on how to punish the people who have committed a terrible crime then we would also lose focus on how to prevent it from happening again. It is unethical to simply kill off those who do a wrong if there continue to be many people who do it. So death penalty would not change anything at all. Some people just want to be bad and don't mind the punishment of death, so then if the death penalty doesn't stop them what will? The causes of the extremes that would result in a death penalty don't need harsh punishments to scare people into not doing them, the need to be stopped completely. If we strictly base these punishments off of crimes then anyone in the military or service similar to that would be punished by death as well. Because of this, death penalty shouldn't exist because of the amount of controversy that surrounds the topic.

Valeria Najera

11/5/2020 03:13:49 pm

In my personal opinion think that the death penalty should not exist since the death penalty does not contribute to achieving a safer society. I believe that there has never been evidence that shows that the death penalty provides a solution to the problem of crime. On the contrary, crime or other things can be reduced by means of a better trained and equipped police force through an effective administration system. Therefore, other families of those sentenced to death share the psychological torment of knowing that the execution can take place at any moment and suffer enormous pain when it is finally carried out. The death penalty is a violation of a fundamental human right and therefore I believe that this is not the correct way in which a person should die.

Anthony Avitia

11/6/2020 08:12:23 am

Carlos Kelly

11/6/2020 08:58:02 am

I believe that there shouldn’t be capital punishment and that is to far life in prison is much more humane and killing people is just to much. It is also contradictory because if we know someone is going to commit suicide but we have the right to kill people under capital punishment. In one case we are trying to stop a life being ended and in the other we are murdering someone. In the end a life is still a life and we should do everything to keep those life’s. In reality does those unjust punishments even effect the wicked they are still going to do there wicked deeds whether or not there are serious punishments for them. The real fought to the madness has to do with us as a community it is because we leave out those people that later turn into monsters who murder innocent people. Us as a society should be the ones who are more inclusive no matter the person. It is because we leave out people or make fun of people or even beat them, it is because these reasons that the wicked are born from. We all stems from personal experience and our personalities are derived from them so if you do repeatedly harmful and mean actions to someone no wonder that’s the way they came out. When looking for punishment for murders it may seem like the logical thing to murder them but the problem won’t be solved by that it will only be solved when we go back to the root. We can’t directly make people be nicer but we can at least tell them to because eventually it will begin to spread and more inclusive environments will be born. When looking at the types of people who are put through these types of punishment there are cases of innocent and wicked victims who go through these punishments but I believe that both don’t deserve it killing them won’t solve a thing and there would be no gain from that type of route. Our mentality needs to change and instead of killing those types of people we should try to work with them and get them to change and redeem themselves from their massive mistakes so that when they pass on at-least they can have some redemption

Jessica Arizmendi link

11/6/2020 12:43:06 pm

I don't think the death penalty should exist because there's so many innocent people that get falsely accused for crimes they didn't commit. And when they go to trial and loose they can get the death penalty and die for no reason. Their life just gets taken away from them, just like that. Even kids got death penalty and after like 70-80 years they finally realized that they were innocent. I think it's wrong especially since a lot of people make mistakes when finding the identity of the person who committed the crime, and turn them in. And even if people weren't innocent and did commit a horrible crime I still don't think they should be put on death row. Killing that person isn't gonna do anything, and as for punishment, people might think its the best punishment for doing something bad. But I think getting life in prison without parole is bad enough.

Eric Giang link

11/9/2020 10:26:37 am

I believe that the death penalty should not exist because every person can change you just need enough time and help. Also, the death penalty is very inhumane I believe and it does not give the chance for someone to change if you were to just end his/her life right there and then. Some people take many years to change and that can be possible in certain places such as prison to help his/her to realize what they have done and to change their thinking and their actions along with it. So if you were to ask me if the death penalty should exist I would say no, but if that person did something that bad to be able to get the death penalty I would say just give them up to a certain amount of years to prison and to try and help to change his/her actions and behavior.

Christopher Quijas

11/10/2020 08:50:56 am

I believe the death penalty should exist for those who I think will never change since why would you would leave someone to die to time even though it really should be allowed. I think insanity can't be changed and really morally why let someone like that a chance when in fact they have no regard for human life and end up losing their humanity. Not only that but todays standards are less cruel to those back then which in my opinion is better option. Let alone to the fact of the matter its also I think should be the decision of the victim to either let that person die to the death penalty or to time rotting away in a cell. Other people would disagree with me but really when you think about it what if there insane but there not devoid of intelligence they could escape and have more of a chance to spill blood.

CIndy Wu

11/11/2020 10:20:23 pm

In my opinion I believe that death penalty should not exist, But at the same time I think death penalty should exist for people who have done the worst crimes. Death penalty should not exist because lots of innocent people get wrongly accused for something they didn't do and their life ends up being taken away. I think that death penalty should only exist for people that have done the worst of worst crimes. Although that person who committed a bad crime might "Change" they would most likely probably end up repeating their past.

Zuying (Hannah) He He P1

11/12/2020 09:28:16 am

In my opinion, the death penalty should not exist. When you simply end one's life, you give them no chance to change whatsoever. The purpose of this death penalty really serves no help to ANYONE. It is just inhumane and you should not kill someone from what they have done, even if they may have committed the worst crimes. By doing so, you take away that person's ability to reflect and improve as a person. Instead, they will just grow more hatred within them, as they will not feel respected or treated fairly. They are humans too, they have feelings and deserve justice. In fact, there are actually people who are innocent but get killed right away without being able to explain themselves. This is why today, we have jail. Sentencing someone to jail would be the best option since we would be able to punish them but at the same time, it does not involve torture or cruel treatments. Everyone deserves chances, even if it is not guaranteed they are willing to change to be the better. In addition, victims of the death penalty have family. They have people who may care for them and believe their innocence. However, if you just automatically kill them, they will never prove themselves and remain a criminal that was killed in the past. Therefore, the death penalty should be illegal.

Matthew Orozco

11/12/2020 10:37:23 am

Personally I believe that the death penalty should not exist, especially since the fact that there are times where the person receiving it is innocent. But regardless of if the person is or isn't innocent doesn't matter the death penalty itself is cruel. Even if the person is a mass murderer doesn't change the fact that he has his life cut off, cutting it off doesn't ever allow anyone the chance to repent or anything. The death punishment should not exist, there should be another way for a punishment other than death, even a couple life sentences is better. At least you would be able to live out your remaining life and think back. Even if the accused has "done" horrible stuff there is technically no way to prove it so this system of punishments makes no sense saying that for a handful of times its imposible to know who did it, leading to innocent people getting the death sentence. In some scenarios there are times where it is known that the person is innocent but nothing can be done about it.

Sean Liang

11/12/2020 06:07:36 pm

Yes, I believe that the capital punishment should exist. Why? Well... looking at the crimes that the executed in America had been either convicted or accused of, they include but are not limited to treason, murder, and espionage. All of these crimes listed are terrible ones. When dealing with spies and traitors, they have information that is too valuable to be released to other countries. They also will likely try to leave anyhow if released, putting said information at risk. People who are convicted of treason or espionage will not give up, there's a reason they're doing what they're doing, so to minimize risk, they are executed(thankfully, painlessly). As for murderers, they actually do have a chance to get out. Death row takes so long to finish because the convicted are trying every legal route possible to get out of it. Those that can't will eventually exhaust their resources and be put to death. Though there are sometimes innocent people killed, the current estimated 4%(let's say 5% to overestimate just in case) of innocents of the 2500 death row inmates would amount to around 128 people at maximum. Though this amount sounds large, it's still not too bad of an innocent to guilty ratio as were the rates of the French Revolution, which saw 17,000 people executed (not just death row). Assuming only 5% were innocent, the total of 850 innocents was definitely worse than the 128 we have, and the Revolution didn't last as America's Death Row. Also, the execution count for America since 1976 is 1524, which was 34 executions per year over 44 years. The French Revolution lasted maybe 11 years max, meaning 1545 executions per year over 11 years. Granted how low our execution rates are and how high our accuracy is with the catching of actual criminals, I think it's fairly safe to keep the death penalty around. Emotions might say "what if that was your family or friend?" I reply with "The US Population is 328.2 million, meaning that the chances that any family or friend of mine has a 1 in 215,354 chance of being put on Death Row, with execution rates even LOWER. For comparison, the rare leaf defect in the white clover, otherwise known as the four-leafed clover, occurs at a rate of 1 in 10,000. If it's that hard to find a mutated white clover and that's more than 21 times more likely to happen than being put on Death Row(not even executed), there's no cause for worry so long as we all play it smart."

Kenneth Ly link

11/12/2020 10:47:41 pm

I object to the usage of capital punishment or death penalty solely for its inhumaneness. With the death penalty, you are essentially ending one's life for their crimes. However, determining the degree of their crimes is often a lengthy and debatable process that combines the different opinions and stances of many individuals with different beliefs.
The underlying issue of punishing criminals in the first place is the concept of "degree" or severity of the crimes they've committed. It is an exclusively subjective concept that brings up no certain consensus. While it is obvious to distinguish which crime is worse per se, such as exceeding the road speed limit compared to a premediated first-degree murder, there isn't a clear dividing line between the more heinous crimes such as mass murder that can result in a lifetime imprisonment or death penalty.
Another issue to consider before applying the death penalty is to prove whether the convicted person is guilty or innocent. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, there are over 170 documented cases of wrongly convicted people sentenced to death since 1973--perhaps done before they were able to testify. While this risk has been considered and the death penalty is now generally given to the worst criminals and murderers, the humaneness of the death penalty has been questioned since.
Generally, a punishment is considered humane as long it does not cause prolonged pain and agony. Torture is one historical method of capital punishment, now abolished by many countries during the Enlightenment. At present, the most common method used (particularly in the US) to execute the convict is by lethal injection. At least 32 states currently use this method, which is intended to quickly sedate the convict before they die silently. Despite this harmonious concept of promptly dying without pain, it is certainly possible for the lethal injection procedure become botched, resulting in prolonged pain for the convict until another procedure is performed. In fact, the Death Penalty Information Center reports that the method of lethal injection has the highest percentage of botched executions--up to 7% compared to the botched execution rate of 5.4% for lethal gassing. One of the most notorious examples of a botched lethal injection was in 2014, when Clayton Lockett undergone a botched execution which led to "writhing, groaning and convulsion" before he ultimately succumbed to a heart attack 43 minutes later (USA Today).
Inserting some of my opinion into my stance, I believe that the anticipation the convicts faced right before their execution is also inhumane. Even the idea of a "last meal" sounds rather grim. Back to my statement against the death penalty, I believe that it is inhumane and should be replaced by another way of punishment without death.

Alexis Ramirez

11/13/2020 10:29:49 am

The death penalty is very extreme, and many argue whether it’s necessary or not. I don’t have a 100% formed opinion. I think it should be only ever be used in cases of murders and serial killers (that have been almost 100% proven to be guilty). Removing the death penalty, and keeping a mass murderer live, is risky because they can potentially break out of jail and kill more innocent lives. Keeping it in place could mean the potential death of an innocent person.

Meric Samaco P5

11/13/2020 10:53:16 am

Death Penalty is more of an imbalanced consequence due to the fact of how it's played out. Mass murderers and terrible people like that, do indeed deserve the death penalty to prevent more crimes and help people deal with their loss in some sort of way. However, when wrongfully accused the death penalty is going to be a harsh way for someone to go out. IN any case, it's the courts that should be improved.

Discussion Board/ Blog:

Our World History class blog brings students together in an online discussion forum. Weekly topics will be posted for students to discuss. Students will receive an additional five points each week for quality responses to our blog topics. Please remember to post respectful and insightful comments and include your full name and period at the conclusion of your response. In addition, you will be required to comment on at least two other students' post to receive the full 5 points.

World History

Education Blogs: