Written Assignment Paper

Introduction

Over the last century, the judicial and penal system has become more effective in charging and housing those that have been found guilty of committing crimes. Individuals that have been charged with committing felonies (i.e. theft, battery, aggravated assault etc.) are receiving harsher and longer criminal convictions and prison sentences, while some of the more serious felony charges ( murder) are receiving death penalty convictions . While many of these convictions and sentences are befitting punishments for the crimes that were committed, there have been a few mitigating circumstances and events where “the punishment for the crime” (or the conditions of the punishment for the crime why are you using this symbol????) have needed for further arguments because of circumstances that many felt should be contested. One issue that has led to death penalty being contested is the medicating of an “insane” death row inmate (use title of the article), in order to make him sane enough in order to later be executed. In this paper, I will argue both the pro’s (or the reasoning) for why the state of Arkansas was in the legal and ethical right of medicating and executing the prisoner on death row and the con’s ( or the reasoning that is against) for why the state of Arkansas shouldn’t have executed the inmate. Good intro

The reason why the execution was right

The execution of an inmate will always come attached with a heavy morality burden (and strong arguments) from people that are in support of the death penalty and those who totally oppose it. The one agreeable point that both of the opposing sides for the previously stated issue is that there should be a form punishment if a crime was committed or if someone was found guilty of committing a crime (even if they don’t agree with the methods of the punishment itself). The state of Arkansas might have been in its morally and ethically right to...