Fire does not care if it burns wood, pig fat or the flesh from one’s own body. Much like this fire, a revolver has no preference. Murder is murder no matter what the circumstances are. Although some people believe Absalom Kumalo kills Arthur Jarvie as an act of self-defense, it is, in fact, murder, and the decided sentence for Absalom to be hanged, is just. The revolver Absalom carries to Arthur Jarvis’ house is a piece of evidence that is a main point of Arthur’s lawyer’s testimony, in which, He says if Absalom's only intent was to scare the servant, then it would not be loaded. “He takes with him a loaded revolver. He maintains that this was for the purpose of intimidation. Why then must it be loaded?” (Paton 234). This clearly states that …show more content…
First of all, if Absalom is fearful that Arthur is going to do something such as call the police of even confront him, then he could have used the iron bar that was brought along with the gun to scare him. Another reason Absalom’s claim to fear is faulty is because he had no reason to fear Arthur. Arthur had no weapon when he walked down the stairs to meet his terrible fate so for Absalom to say he was scared and pulled the trigger out of fear, he is lying. Overall, the fact that Absalom pulls the trigger on his revolver to kill Arthur, out of fear, is false and has no support to back it up.
To conclude, although some people believe Absalom Kumalo kills Arthur Jarvis as an act of self defense, it is , in fact, murder and the decided sentence for Absalom to be hung is just. First, if Absalom only plans to bring a revolver to Arthur’s house, then the gun would not be loaded. Second, if Absalom has practiced shooting a gun before, he would have better aim and not shoot where he knows it will be a deadly shot. Third, Absalom’s punishment, to be hanged, is just because jail time would not have any effect on him. Overall, Absalom commits murder thus his punishment to be hanged is
First of all, it starts out with my first piece of evidence to answer the question which is (“It appears to me, Absalom, that he’s coming up to that real fast. He’s big already and going to be bigger. Tell me, Lije, are you planning on helping the cause of abolition here? The man’s deeply lined face darkened the look as he looked down at the boy. “ Do you know what that sacred word means” Though frightened by the stark appearance of this awe-inspiring visitor,
Since Martin Bryant’s massacre on Port Arthur, the legal system in Australia is amended and reformed gun laws to create a more effective legislation. Gun-related deaths have since been drawn to more efficient attention in Australian psyche, whilst the issue of gun-laws on a global level still remains as a conspiracy in many countries. The massacre left the Australian nation in shock, with a heavily involved attitude on behalf of local and national police, and thousands devastated at the aftermath. The legislation of gun-laws and amendments continues to be controversial, with punishments including Bryant’s being one of popular debate, and the general ownership and use of guns causing conflict within the interrelationship of the legal system and society.
On September 12th, Carmela Buhbut, a battered wife who shot her husband to death 31 times from a close range, was sentenced to seven years imprisonment. She then appealed to the Supreme Court against the severity of the sentence. No less than three different justices held the complicated appeal- Bach, Kedmi and Dorner. All three of them, agreed that there is no doubt, that taking a person’s life is a crime which Buhbut should be punished for. However, only of them, justice Kedmi, thought the appeal should be dismiss in limine.
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.
Argumentative Essay on Capital Punishment in Australia Capital punishment is barbaric and inhumane and should not be re-introduced into Australia. Although capital punishment has been abolished, the debate on this topic has never abated. When a particularly heinous crime is committed, this debate arouses strong passions on both sides. Many who advocate the abolition of capital punishment consider the death penalty to be cruel and inhuman, while those who favor of punishment by death see it as a form of just retribution for the gravest of crimes. Determining whether Queensland should re-introduce capital punishment as a sentence will be the focus of this assignment.
Incapacitation is another oft-cited justification for use of the death penalty, since no murderer has ever been executed and subsequently gone on to kill again. Radelet & Borg (2000) state t...
This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.
Before addressing the dilemma of capital punishment and its relation to Kant's "Respect for Persons" ethics, it is important to be informed of the background of this dilemma. A topic of growing and heated debate in today's society, capital punishment involves many more aspects than the average citizen may think. This controversial practice, which is also commonly referred to as the death penalty, is defined as the legally authorized killing of someone as punishment for a crime. Today, the federal government and thirty-two of the fifty states permit execution for first-degree murder. (Death Penalty Information Center) A majority of executions are carried out through lethal injection, but electrocution, hanging, the gas chamber, and firing squads are still legal in a few states. In states that allow for more than one option, death row inmates are allowed to choose their execution given qualifying circumstances. Under specific circumstances and in certain jurisdictions, treason, kidnapping, aggravated rape, felony murder, and murder while unde...
... found justice for the victim who lost their lives at the hand of a criminal. The critics of capital punishment argue that the government over reached it authority pertaining to the death penalty and have sought to judge in God stead. However, the advocates of capital punishment argue that many nations whether modern or ancient has used capital punishment as a method of justice. This author think that capital murder is a debatable issue that should always be approach with caution.
According to “Capital Punishment, Gun Ownership, and “Homicide”, it is attempting to answer “two controversial questions, both related to the problem of interpersonal violence in America.” One of the questions asks if “the use of the death penalty exert any measurable influence on the rate of homicide in the U.S.?” and the other asks “what relationship, if any, exists between the level of gun ownership and the level of homicidal violence?” (G. Kleck, 1979)
“How the Death Penalty Saves Lives” According to DPIC (Death penalty information center), there are one thousand –four hundred thirty- eight executions in the United States since 1976. Currently, there are Two thousand –nine hundred –five inmates on death row, and the average length of time on death row is about fifteen years in the United States. The Capital punishment, which appears on the surface to the fitting conclusion to the life of a murder, in fact, a complicated issue that produces no clear resolution.; However, the article states it’s justice. In the article “How the Death Penalty Saves Lives” an author David B. Muhlhausen illustrates a story of Earl Ringo , Jr, brutal murder’s execution on September ,10,
Luckily, she had a conceal to carry and when she pulled her gun out, they fled.” (McCoy) If the woman had not had a gun in her possession, then the outcome could have been much worse. Luckily though, she held a concealed carry and she had a gun with her, which therefore made a life changing difference. Another case where having a concealed carry saved a life was one where an attacker broke into a woman’s home. The woman, who was getting out of the shower at the time, was met by the attacker who was holding a kitchen knife in his hands. The woman put up a fight, and fell back into the tub when she lost the struggle. She knew she had to do something, so she convinced the man that she had money in her bedroom. When going to retrieve the “money”, she grabbed a .22 caliber handgun and shot her attacker nine times. Police say the man ran out the door and collapsed, dying in her backyard. (Hawkins) Monica Jones, mother of three kids, heard the neighbor child screaming one Thursday. When she went to go see what the commotion was all about, she discovered a man who had ripped the child’s clothes off and had tried to rape her. Jones pointed a shotgun at the man and told him to stay or she would shoot him. (Hawkins) It is times like the ones above that make having a gun around a priceless opportunity. There are bad guys everywhere. Guns are like fire extinguishers.
ABSTRACT: In this paper I present a moral argument against capital punishment that does not depend upon the claim that all killing is immoral. The argument is directed primarily against non-philosophers in the Judeo-Christian tradition. Oddly, the moral argument against capital punishment has not been effective in the United States despite the biblical injunction against killing. Religious supporters of the death penalty often invoke a presumed distinction between ‘killing’ and ‘murdering’ and avow that God forbade the latter but not the former. Self-defense and just wars are cited as cases of morally justified killing. Accepting these premises, I point out that when cases of justified killing in self-defense are altered to include an element of delay, disarming and premeditation, they too become murder. Since the death penalty clearly involves the elements of delay, disarming and premeditation, I conclude that the death penalty is murder in the biblical sense and ought to be abolished in any God-fearing (or otherwise moral) society.
There are some individuals who are innocent and a due to difficult circumstances, they become criminals. Firearms cannot be used by its own sake; the only way they can kill, is by an individual holding the trigger; because it is people that kill people. Gun leads to violence and gives power to others. Every single state, within the United States should advocate to create more laws that can restrict in some way the use of firearms to prevent the increasing rate of gun violence across the country.
was in jail for killing ("The Case"1). For us to kill those people who have