The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense of Capital Punishment
1.How does van den Haag respond to the argument that capital punishment is wrong because it is applied in a discriminatory manner?
According, to Professor van den Haag, distribution of punishment is not the issue and is irrelevant in administering capital punishment. If the person is guilty then he should be punished, consequently the real unfairness is when a person is let out lightly after committing a heinous crime. He argues that punishment is not administered on the race but it is administered on an individual.
2.How does van den Haag respond to the argument that capital punishment is wrong because an innocent person may be executed?
According to Professor van den Haag the number
How does the author argue that the inevitable executing of the innocent is not a reason to abolish the death penalty?
In his essay, Continuing the Search for Kinder Executions, published in The New York Times2003, Mark Essig gradually reveals his opinions on the brutality of capital punishment. Even though prisoners may have committed acts that can be classified as wrong with the law, Essig believes that they should not endure any sufferance during capital punishment because it is inhumane. This action does not mean they will be able to get away with the crimes; they should just not be able to be brutally punished. While the author acknowledges logical arguments that favor capital punishment, he counters with carefully worded emotionally laded examples that oppose the practice of executing felons because he is against cruel punishments.
This essay with critique “Race Capital Punishment and the Cost of Murder” by M. Cholbi. The Critique will discuss and point out some unnecessary concepts and flaws in the author’s argument along with logical fallacies. The author appeals for a moratorium among capital punishment due to racial disparities. This essay will analyze the author’s paper on the subject of race and capital punishment. The subject of capital punishment is controversial, as some citizens believe capital punishment is unconstitutional. Other citizens believe it does not matter if a convict is black or white, if a person murders someone they deserve to die.
Dieter, Richard C. "Innocence and the Death Penalty: The Increasing Danger of Executing the Innocent." DPIC. Death Penalty Information Center, 1 July 1997. Web. 12 Dec. 2014. .
This paper will examine the pros and cons of the death penalty. Is it a deterrent or is that a myth. Does it give the family of the victim peace or does it cause them to suffer waiting for appeal after appeal. What are the forms of execution and any evidence of them being cruel and usual punishment. Is the death penalty fair if there are glaring, disparities in sentencing depending on geographic location and the color of the offender and victim’s skin?
Opponents of capital punishment are outspoken and vehement in their arguments. They believe the death penalty does not does not deter crime. They also hold the opinion that endin...
Race plays a large factor in showing how you are viewed in society. Although there is no longer slavery and separate water fountains, we can still see areas of our daily life clearly affected by race. One of these areas is the criminal justice system and that is because the color of your skin can easily yet unfairly determine if you receive the death penalty. The controversial evidence showing that race is a large contributing factor in death penalty cases shows that there needs to be a change in the system and action taken against these biases. The issue is wide spread throughout the United States and can be proven with statistics. There is a higher probability that a black on white crime will result in a death penalty verdict than black on black or white on black. Race will ultimately define the final ruling of the sentence which is evident in the racial disparities of the death penalty. The amount of blacks on death row can easily be seen considering the majority of the prison population is black or blacks that committed the same crime as a white person but got a harsher sentence. The biases and prejudices that are in our society relating to race come to light when a jury is selected to determine a death sentence. So what is the relationship between race and the death penalty? This paper is set out to prove findings of different race related sentences and why blacks are sentenced to death more for a black on white crime. Looking at the racial divide we once had in early American history and statistics from sources and data regarding the number of blacks on death row/executed, we can expose the issues with this racial dilemma.
This country is determined to prove that killing someone under certain circumstances is acceptable, when in all reality there can be no rationalization for the taking of another human life. Killing is murder. It is as simple as that. There have been so many different controversies surrounding this debate that often, the issues become clouded in false statistics and slewed arguments. The basic fact remains that killing is morally and ethically wrong. This fact does not disappear by simply changing the term "murder" to "capital punishment". The act is still the taking of a life. On these grounds, the death penalty should be abolished.
The capital punishment has been cited as a reasonable sentence by those who advocate for retribution. This is essentially when it comes to justice so that people take full responsibility for their individual actions. Studies have proved that the decision to take away life of a person because they committed a certain crime serves to perpetuate the crime in question. It also serves to enhance the progress of organized and violent crime. It has been noted that various flaws in the justice system has led to the wrong conviction of innocent people. On the other hand, the guilty have also been set free, and a plethora of several cases has come up when a critical look at the capital punishment has been undertaken. Killers hardly kill their victims deliberately, but they probably act on anger, passion, or impulsively. In this regard, it is not proper to convict them exclusively without
Andre, Claire, and Manuel Velasquez. “Capital Punishment.” Our Duty or Our Doom. 12 May 2010. 30 May 2010 .
that society has a moral obligation to protect the safety and the welfare of its
... person’s life? How can the death penalty continue to be justified in the face of over-whelming evidence which shows that innocent people have been wrongfully executed, that people are not deterred from committing murder, and that, in practice, the death penalty is racially biased and reserved for the poor. In a New York Times Op-Ed piece (July 14, 1995), writer, E.L. Doctorow, speaking in behalf of an inmate on death row wrote, “If the death penalty must exist in this country, it is the burden of the public servants charged with applying it to do so only from the most unanswerable and awesome judicial imperatives--or state-administered death becomes morally indistinguishable from any other murder.” Bibliography Butterfield, Greg. Repression Spurs Resistance. Workers World. 2/24/00 pg. 7 Cauthen, Kenneth. Capital Punishment: Maximum public safety (11/18/00) Online.available: Doctorow,E.L. and Weinglass, Leonard. Race for Justice. Monroe, Maine 1995 Guiterrez, Tony. Crime in America NewYork 1997 Rubac, Gloria. Illinois moratorium accelerates anti-death–penalty across U.S. Workers World. 2/17/00. pg. 5
Americans have argued over the death penalty since the early days of our country. In the United States only 38 states have capital punishment statutes. As of year ended in 1999, in Texas, the state had executed 496 prisoners since 1930. The laws in the United States have change drastically in regards to capital punishment. An example of this would be the years from 1968 to 1977 due to the nearly 10 year moratorium. During those years, the Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment violated the Eight Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. However, this ended in 1976, when the Supreme Court reversed the ruling. They stated that the punishment of sentencing one to death does not perpetually infringe the Constitution. Richard Nixon said, “Contrary to the views of some social theorists, I am convinced that the death penalty can be an effective deterrent against specific crimes.”1 Whether the case be morally, monetarily, or just pure disagreement, citizens have argued the benefits of capital punishment. While we may all want murders off the street, the problem we come to face is that is capital punishment being used for vengeance or as a deterrent.
The use of capital punishment greatly deters citizens from committing nefarious crimes, such as murder (“Justice Is Served with the Death Penalty”). In general, one of the things people fear the most is death; therefore they are less likely to perform heinous actions if they know that death is a punishment for it. Ernest van den Haag, professor at Fordham University, stated, “ …capital punishment is likely to deter more than other punishments because people fear death more than anything else. 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...
Crime is everywhere. Wherever we look, we find criminals and crime. Criminals have become a part of our daily lives. Does this mean we let them be the darkness of our society? No, definitely not. Eliminating crime and criminals is our duty, and we cannot ignore it. Getting the rightly accused to a just punishment is very important. Some criminals commit a crime because they have no other option to survive, but some do it for fun. I do not advocate death penalty for everybody. A person, who stole bread from a grocery store, definitely does not deserve death penalty. However, a serial killer, who kills people for fun or for his personal gain, definitely deserves death penalty. Death penalty should continue in order to eliminate the garbage of our society. Not everybody deserves to die, but some people definitely do. I support death penalty because of several reasons. Firstly, I believe that death penalty serves as a deterrent and helps in reducing crime. Secondly, it is true that death penalty is irreversible, but it is hard to kill a wrongly convicted person due to the several chances given to the convicted to prove his innocence. Thirdly, death penalty assures safety of the society by eliminating these criminals. Finally, I believe in "lex tallionis" - a life for a life.