Capital punishment is feared by potential murderers because once it is ordered on them they are not coming back. When those potential murderers are deterred away form murder, those are innocent lives that are saved. Further, if we get rid of capital punishment we will just be showing criminals that they can get away with murder, and be punished that severely.
In some respects, capital punishment is no better than the actions of a serial killer; it is killing for the sake of killing. I feel that if a person is deemed to be a threat to society then he should be removed from society and not... ... middle of paper ... ...east that way, if he is innocent, he would have the opportunity to prove his innocence. Upon researching this subject, I was extremely disturbed to find that the United States is one of the few countries that still has the death penalty. We really need to take another look at our justice system and try to bring about changes. The answer to society’s problems is not to just get rid of those people we believe are a threat to our security, but try to get to the root of the problem.
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT Crime is a part of our lives, it is everywhere! Controlling or eliminating crime and criminals is no easy task but it can not be ignored. Making sure those that are rightly accused to a just punishment is very important. There are many reasons why people commit crimes; some do it for the shear of enjoyment others do it to be able to survive. The death penalty should not be used for every crime, although I strongly believe it should be used for those who commit very violent crimes, such as murder.
The death penalty has also been imposed for such crimes as armed robbery, kidnapping, rape and treason. Some people believe that capital punishment is necessary for punishing people that have committed any type of crime, much of the time because these people want justice; others think that capital punishment is only necessary in extreme cases, such as murder, while others believe that it is wrong and shouldn't be aloud to take place. Amnesty International's thoughts on the death penalty is that it is 'cruel, inhumane and degrading punishment and a violation of the right to life'. In extreme cases, I believe that people should be punished. People who commit crimes such as murder (mass or only an individual killing), rape and kidnapping should all be punished for what they have done.
• The death penalty is the only thing that these criminals fear.  Murderers have exhausted all options of appeals in order to prevent being executed themselves. • The death penalty is not cruel.  Forms of execution that are utilized are methods where the brain does not have a chance to feel pain. • The death penalty is the best answer for murder.
There are a few states that give extra stipulations on capital punishment, but for this essay, the focus shall just be on those two crimes. A few may bring about the argument that capital punishment is just punishing murder with murder. On the contrary, capital punishment is not murder; it works more like a self-defense for everyone else. If capital punishment is wrong, is killing in self-defense to prevent harm to you wrong also? The basic idea behind capital punishment is in fact self-defense.
This argument by Kant shows that offenders will get what they deserve when they commit a wrongful act, but some criminals or murderers don’t really know what is going on, thus they are not deserving of punishment. Kant believes in universalizing the maxims which you act on, hence a murderer has willed that the same thing be done to him which makes the death penalty morally required according to Kant(Kant, pg 240). This shows that Kant is a strong supporter of the death penalty because without it how would we be able to rightfully punish murderers. Therefore all murderers ought to be sentenced to death row and if they are not proven inno... ... middle of paper ... ...idivist murders, in which murderers are given the opportunity to kill innocent people while they are sentenced. Therefore, no matter how you look at it the retributivists have two risks while Bedau only has one.
On the other hand, such as with a voluntary murder, the ideas are somewhat similar. They believe the murderer doesn’t deserve the death penalty. Chances are if a person is insane enough to kill another human being in the first place, they aren’t going to care what happens to them. They 2 realize that their execution, in most cases, is going to be short and painless. This isn’t a just punishment for someone who has inflicted severe pain upon another life.
They fear most, death deliberately inflicted by law and scheduled by the courts….Hence, the threat of the death penalty may deter some murderers who otherwise might not have been deterred. And surely the death penalty is the only penalty that could deter prisoners already serving a life sentence and tempted to kill a guard, or offenders about to be arrested and facing a life sentence.” Ernest’s argument is that capital punishment is the strongest deterrent society has against murder. Isaac Ehrlich cond... ... middle of paper ... ...e the applicable punishment, which in some cases may be the death penalty. Capital punishment can be a difficult topic to approach because people tend to have extreme views on it. The death penalty is a benefit to society; it deters potential criminals as well as serves as retribution to criminals, and is in no way immoral.
Many people are split on the idea of capital punishment because it involves death. I feel that capital punishment is morally and ethically acceptable because it rids society of our worst criminals. Many people argue that killing criminals who kill is just as bad as being the criminals. For one the criminals killed innocent people who had no idea what was coming, and had no way to prevent it. The criminal who commited the crime in almost all cases had to commit first degree murder, which includes some planning of the act.