To begin with, public executions is not an outmoded subject that has caused disputable opinions. Executions that can be viewed by the public was once a legal practice and a part of history in the United States. Surprisingly, public executions can be viewed as the norm in some countries around the world. In fact, lynching was a popular form in America to dehumanize the offender and to use him or her as a lesson for the community to beware of the consequences. Displaying the executed in a public area would desensitize society to eventually adapt to the bizarre laws. The dehumanization of an offender is an effective strategy for society to feel no remorse over a criminal. By all means, the public would rather celebrate and be relieved that a criminal In addition, society will no longer view the offender as a member of society but a pariah that deserves to be brutally punished. After all, public executions was not an unfamiliar concept exposed to society. For instance, lynching of accused witches and African Americans was repeatedly practiced to the point where the event had a carnival atmosphere. Also, it was assumed that witnessing death would discipline society to obey the laws, but rather a lack of compassion and empathy occurred instead. “The necessity to execute murderers to maintain societal order” (Bandura, 1). To further justify executions culture has no choice but to treat an individual as a subhuman that deserves no sympathy from the public. In addition, culture embraces the idea that executions is the key to avenge a murder committed by a criminal incapable of following the principles of society. The murder of an innocent victim makes the public feel the need to take vengeance by executing the criminal. Indeed, being exposed to violence and the legalization of executions will ease the guilt and moral expectations that society is supposed to feel but does not. Executions has evolved into a debauched ceremony where the public can view and does not to endure any concern for a dehumanized criminal. Nevertheless, dehumanization of society has and will continue to prosper as culture is desensitized from
Franklin Zimring (2003) examines the relationship between the history of lynching and current capital punishment in the United States argueing that the link between them is a vigilante tradition. He adequately shows an association between historical lynchings and modern executions, though this paper will show additional evidence that would help strengthen this argument, but other areas of Zimring’s argument are not as well supported. His attitudinal and behavioral measures of modern vigilantism are insufficient and could easily be interpreted as measuring other concepts. Also missing from Zimring’s analysis is an explanation for the transition of executions from representing government control in the past to executions as representing community control in the present. Finally, I argue that Zimring leaves out any meaningful discussion of the role of race in both past lynchings and modern executions. To support my argument, using recent research, I will show how race has played an important role in both past lynchings and modern executions and how the changing form of racial relations may explain the transition from lynchings to legal executions.
In recent years, people are always arguing that should executions be televised or not. We still do not solve this problem now. In the article “Executions Should Be Televised” by Zachary B. Shemtob and David Lat, they stated that “Right now, executions are generally open only to the press and a few select witnesses. For us, the vague contours are provided in the morning paper. Yet a functioning democracy demands maximum accountability and transparency. As long as executions remain behind closed doors, those are impossible. The people should have the right to see what is being done in their name and with their tax dollars.” (Lat 4) There are also many other people think executions should not be televised and I am one of them.
Throughout America’s history, capital punishment, or the death penalty, has been used to punish criminals for murder and other capital crimes. In the early 20th century, numerous people would gather for public executions. The media described these events gruesome and barbaric (“Infobase Learning”). People began to wonder if the capital punishment was really constitutional.
The death penalty, as administered by states based on their individual laws, is considered capital punishment, the purpose of which is to penalize criminals convicted of murder or other heinous crimes (Fabian). The death penalty issue has been the focus of much controversy in recent years, even though capital punishment has been a part of our country's history since the beginning. Crimes in colonial times, such as murder and theft of livestock were dealt with swiftly and decisively ("The Death Penalty..."). Criminals were hanged shortly after their trial, in public executions. This practice was then considered just punishment for those crimes. Recently though, the focus of the death penalty debate has been on moral and legal issues. The murderers of today's society can be assured of a much longer life even after conviction, with the constraints of the appeals process slowing the implementation of their death sentence. In most cases, the appeal process lasts several years, during which time criminals enjoy comfortable lives. They have television, gym facilities, and the leisure time to attend free college-level classes that most American citizens must struggle to afford. Foremost, these murderers have the luxury of time, something their victims ran out of the moment their paths crossed. It is time this country realized the only true justice for these criminals is in the form of the death penalty. The death penalty should be administered for particularly heinous crimes.
Throughout the ages, death penalty has always been a controversial topic and triggered numerous insightful discussion. In Kroll’s Unquiet Death of Robert Harris, the writer employs pathos as an appeal throughout the whole article in order to convince the audiences that death penalty is “something indescribably ugly” and “nakedly barbaric”. While Mencken makes use of ethos and logos and builds his arguments in a more constructive and effective way to prove that death penalty is necessary and should exist in the social system.
Capital punishment, otherwise known as “The Death Penalty,” has been around for many years and has been the cause of death for over twelve hundred inmates since 1976 (“Death Penalty Information Center”), but is the Death Penalty really beneficial to the American public? This question is in the back of many people’s minds, and has left many questioning the meaning of the punishment. The death penalty targets murderers or high profile cases. Some say that the death penalty should apply to those who murder, rape, or abuse human beings such as children, or women. The significance of the penalty is to teach these criminals that there are laws that must be followed. In a figurative sense, it is to teach those potential wrongdoers a lesson. By examining the facts around us, we can gain a greater sense of security, and a greater understanding of what the death penalty can accomplish, all while assessing the high-quality aspects that the penalty has to offer.
In this paper I will argue for the moral permissibility of the death penalty and I am fairly confident that when the case for capital punishment is made properly, its appeal to logic and morality is compelling. The practice of the death penalty is no longer as wide-spread as it used to be throughout the world; in fact, though the death penalty was nearly universal in past societies, only 71 countries world-wide still officially permit the death penalty (www.infoplease.com); the U.S. being among them. Since colonial times, executions have taken place in America, making them a part of its history and tradition. Given the pervasiveness of the death penalty in the past, why do so few countries use the death penalty, and why are there American states that no longer sanction its use? Is there a moral wrong involved in the taking of a criminal’s life? Of course the usual arguments will be brought up, but beyond the primary discourse most people do not go deeper than their “gut feeling” or personal convictions. When you hear about how a family was ruthlessly slaughtered by a psychopathic serial killer most minds instantly feel that this man should be punished, but to what extent? Would it be just to put this person to death?
If you get a different perspective of what is going on around the world is that we are seeing internationally that the decline of the use of executions as a means of getting rid of crimina...
Eliminating the death penalty as a method of punishment will only allow criminals to wreak havoc and chaotic in our community without the fear of death. When a person commits a crime, they are disrupting the order in the community. Justice help restore the disruption of that order. The Death penalty restore social order and give the states authority to maximized retribution for the victims. When the state does not have the authority to maximum retribution, the public may put the law in their own hands. Although, execution may be cruel and inhumane, it is nothing compared to the fate of many victims in the hand of the murderers. The purpose of the death penalty is to provide retribution for the victims and their families. However, retribution is not revenge. “Vengeance signifies inflicting harm on the offender out of anger because of what he has done. Retribution is the rationally supported theory that the criminal deserves a punishment fitting the gravity of his crime” (Pojman, 2004).
Have you ever wondered why people are so interested to learn about the suffrage of others? Over twenty-five years, the population of prisoners has nearly sextulped. Reaching about 1.7 million since 1996, which is almost equal to the population to Houston, Texas, the fourth largest city in the nation (Elliott Currie). All we focus on is how they did it? and why? In other words, many people interpret crime as entertainment, and don’t think about the negative effects taking place in the world or even more that individual. In some cases the innocent are being accused of unlikely punishment but how do they determine? Considerably, the death penalty has been the topic of discussion these past years. This so called “penalty” is becoming the prime consequence in most cases. I think that the use of the death penalty as punishment is wrong because of the psychological effects it has on prisoners, time spent on death row in cases of innocents, and the costly outcome.
The death penalty continues to be an issue of controversy and is an issue that will be debated in the United States for many years to come. According to Hugo A. Bedau, the writer of “The Death Penalty in America”, capital punishment is the lawful infliction of the death penalty. The death penalty has been used since ancient times for a variety of offenses. The Bible says that death should be done to anyone who commits murder, larceny, rapes, and burglary. It appears that public debate on the death penalty has changed over the years and is still changing, but there are still some out there who are for the death penalty and will continue to believe that it’s a good punishment. I always hear a lot of people say “an eye for an eye.” Most people feel strongly that if a criminal took the life of another, their’s should be taken away as well, and I don’t see how the death penalty could deter anyone from committing crimes if your going to do the crime then at that moment your not thinking about being on death role. I don’t think they should be put to death they should just sit in a cell for the rest of their life and think about how they destroy other families. A change in views and attitudes about the death penalty are likely attributed to results from social science research. The changes suggest a gradual movement toward the eventual abolition of capital punishment in America (Radelet and Borg, 2000).
“A Death in Texas” by Steve Earle is the true-life story of a friendship that occurred over ten
Crime constructs us as a society whilst society, simultaneously determines what is criminal. Since society is always changing, how we see crime and criminal behavior is changing, thus the way in which we punish those criminal behaviors changes. In the early modern era in Europe, public executions were the primary punishment given to members of society who were involved in criminal behavior. This form of punishment served to showcase the absolute power of the state, King and church to take away the life of any citizen who disrupts peace. It was a way to make the criminal justice system visible and effective in an era when the criminal justice system was in its beginning stages of demonstrating orderliness (Spierenburg). More specifically, it was a relatively straightforward and psychological way to evoke deterrence. The potential of gruesome violence, public persecution and religious betrayal were tools thought to be strong enough to make public executions a successful form of deterrence because within the community, social bonds and religion were the fou...
Capital punishment has been a controversial topic in association to any person condemned to a serious committed crime. Capital punishment has been a historical punishment for any cruel crime. Issues associated to things such as the different methods used for execution in most states, waste of taxpayers’ money by performing execution, and how it does not serve as any form of justice have been a big argument that raise many eyebrows. Capital punishment is still an active form of deterrence in the United States. The history of the death penalty explains the different statistics about capital punishment and provides credible information as to why the form of punishment should be abolished by every state. It is believed
It must be remembered that criminals are real people too, which have. life and with it, the feeling of pain, fear and the loss of their loved ones and all the other emotions that the rest of us feel. There is no such thing as a humane way of putting someone to death. Every type of execution causes the prisoner physical suffering, some. methods perhaps cause less than others, but be in no doubt that being.