Does this mean that we should throw out the death penalty because people, who did not really deserve to die, were killed? No, we have changed the laws, and no one gets the death penalty unless they deserve to die. Capital punishment should stay around. Yes, there are some maldistributions on the way it is opposed on a person, but those maldistributions are imposed on guilty people. Capital punishment is feared by potential murderers because once it is ordered on them they are not coming back.
Capital Punishment In my opinion capital punishment is wrong. The death penalty is the center of much debate in society. This is due, in part, to the fact that people see only the act of killing a criminal, and not the social effects the death penalty has on society as a whole. Upon reading about the death penalty, it was found to be an unethical practice. It promotes a violent and inhumane society in which killing is considered okay.
Killing is an evil act, but when it is committed, the only way to achieve justice is by dealing the killer the same hand they dealt an innocent. Human rights are violated by not eliminating the people who take someone else’s, because allowing someone who has murdered in cold blood to continue living is just as disrespectful to the person killed as the murderer taking their life in the first place. By eliminating these people, society is actually acknowledging the sanctity of human life. The death penalty is the moral solution because protecting a killer holds the same immorality as killing a person directly, and if we defend a killer, what makes us any better than them?
Rationalization of the death penalty only equates to judicial murder. The same judges inflict unnecessary pain on the loved ones of the executed. If what we are all striving for is less pain, than we should not be advocating more. There are no easy answers, nor is there a clear line of right and wrong. Individual free will leads to differences within us all.
We should not, therefore, punish the murderer with death. Capital punishment is a barbaric remnant of uncivilized society. The death penalty is unfair because it does not single out the worst of the worst. Instead of going for big bad offenders, the death penalty is used on an arbitrary group. Such factors ... ... middle of paper ... ...is a killing chain.
It is morally wrong, individually or through government action, to seek revenge on a murderer by means of execution. The death penalty violates our right to life. Capital Punishment is Not an Effective Deterrent As justification for capital punishment, deterrence is used to suggest that executing murderers will decrease the homicide rate by causing other potential murderers not to commit murder from fear of being executed themselves and obviously the murderer who is executed will not kill again. This position may seem initially correct, and indeed, in a USA Today Poll, 68% of respondents agreed that the death penalty is an effective deterrence for crimes. However, some research suggests that rather than deterring homicide, state executions actually may cause an increase in the number of homicides (Stack, 1990).
“There are some defendants who have earned the ultimate punishment our society has to offer by committing murder with aggravating circumstances present. I believe life is sacred. It cheapens the life of an innocent murder victim to say that society has no right to keep the murderer from ever killing again. In my view, society has not only the right, but the duty to act in self defense to protect the innocent", argues the ... ... middle of paper ... ...ent person on death row. There have been several cases that evidence were proven to exonerate death row inmates.
Life imprisonment without the possibility of parole is a realistic alternative for the small number of offenders who are likely to be executed in any given year. Justice does not demand death but justice does demand that murderers be punished. If punishment is justifiable as for restoring justice and the moral order, it does not necessarily follow that capitol punishment is moral. " The death penalty only allows us to extend the pain. It allows us to continue to blame one another, to turn against one another, to learn to hate better" .
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.
Capital Punishment What type of society kills its own people? The American culture’s morals have accepted the death penalty as a reasonable punishment. However, who gives us the power to determine when someone’s life should end. People who murder others should be punished and pay the price of their crime, but not killed. Our society feels so strongly that murder is wrong and criminals should be killed.