Sample Thesis Paper
Collecting objective and reliable information about how capital punishment systems operate is a necessary starting point. How that information should be used in combination with the normative issues surrounding the death penalty is appropriately left to legislative and, where relevant, judicial bodies. Our plea is a simple one: to assemble and make available trustworthy data about the full range of empirical issues implicated by a jurisdiction’s capital punishment system. It is our belief that when the true facts are marshaled and fully penetrate the public conscience, they cannot help but tip the scales radically against capital punishment. We anticipate that death penalty systems will crumble under the combined weight of their own inefficiencies and inequities. Others may disagree, or may conclude that whatever problems are exposed is remediable, or even inconsequential. Until the debate is fully informed by the totality of available empirical information, which we consider to be a crucial mission of study commissions and social science researchers, the legitimacy of death penalty systems remains very much at issue.
The American Bar Association (ABA) was active in arousing the country to the need to reconsider the rules and regulations regarding law for death penalty. This venerable organisation called for a national cessation on implementations with the help of a resolution adopted February 3, 1997 (Bright, 1845). The ABA expressed particular concerns about the quality of counsel being provided in capital cases and about issues of innocence and racial disparities in death penalty systems. (Coyne, 51). Other state and local lawyers groups have recently echoed the ABA’s plea in their own jurisdictions, including the Atlanta Bar Association, the Philadelphia Bar Association, the Virginia Trial Lawyers Association and the New York State Bar Association. (Bright, 1986).