Capital punishment is the death penalty.
Share1 Shares 1K The existence of the death penalty in any society raises one underlying question: The lister has set out to examine both sides of the debate over the ethics and legality of capital punishment, especially in the US, and chooses neither side in any of the following entries.
They are not presented in any meaningful order. It Teaches the Condemned Nothing What is the purpose of punishment? We take our lead from one major source, our parents—and they no doubt took their lead from their own parents. When your young child emulates what he just saw in a Rambo movie, you give him a stern lecture about what is real and what is not, what is acceptable in real life and what is not.
When your child tries some crazy acrobatic move off a piece of furniture and hurts himself, you might spank him to be sure that he remembers never to do it again. So when the child grows up, breaks into a home, and steals electronics, he gets caught and goes to prison.
His time in prison is meant to deprive him of the freedom to go where he wants anywhere in the world, and to do what he wants when he wants. This is the punishment, and most people do learn from it. In general, no one wants to go back. But if that child grows up and murders someone for their wallet or just for fun, and they are in turn put to death, they are taught precisely nothing, because they are no longer alive to learn from it.
We cannot rehabilitate a person by killing him or her. It is the Ultimate Warning Nevertheless, if would-be criminals know undoubtedly that they will be put to death should they murder with premeditation, very many of them are much less inclined to commit murder.
Whether or not would-be criminals are wary of committing the worst crime is an important—and probably impossible—question to answer. Murder still happens very frequently.
So some criminals disregard this warning for various reasons. In a larger sense, capital punishment is the ultimate warning against all crimes.
If the criminal knows that the justice system will not stop at putting him to death, then the system appears more draconian to him. Hence, he is less inclined to break and enter.
He may have no intention of killing anyone in the process of robbing them, but is much more apprehensive about the possibility if he knows he will be executed. Thus, there is a better chance that he will not break and enter in the first place. It Does Not Dissuade If the foreknowledge of any punishment is meant to dissuade the criminal from committing the crime, why do people still murder others?
The US had a murder rate of 4. If it does not dissuade, then it serves no purpose. The warning of life in prison without parole must equally dissuade criminals. It Provides Closure for Victims There are many victims of a single murder. The criminal gets caught, tried, and convicted, and it is understood that the punishment will be severe.
But the person he has killed no longer has a part to play in this. Unfortunately, the murderer has deprived his family and friends of a loved one. Their grief begins with the murder. A system in place for the purpose of granting justice cannot do so for the surviving victims, unless the murderer himself is put to death.
It Is Hypocritical It is strange that a nation would denounce the practice of murder by committing the very same act.
True—as a whole, we are not murderers, and understandably refuse to be placed in the same category as someone like Ted Bundy. But to many opponents of the death penalty, even Ted Bundy should have been given life without parole. The fact that he murdered at least thirty people—for the mere reason that he enjoyed doing it—has no bearing on the hypocrisy, the flagrant dishonesty, of the declaration that such a person deserves to be killed because he had no right to kill.
If the goal of any punishment, as stated above, is to teach us those things we should not do, then the justice system should more adequately teach the criminality of killing by refusing to partake in it. It was obvious that he feared being put to death. He did his best to avert it.
This means that he did not fear life in prison—at least not as much as he feared capital punishment. He had many opportunities to kill himself in his cell, but he did not.
He might have done it a month before his execution, when all hope for clemency was gone—but he was afraid of death.
It Is Always Cruel In the end, though, death is always at least a little painful.A description of death as a common theme in many poems Us government should follow through on cases of death penalty catalogs An introduction to the religious myth of . He'd been up all night worrying about the book they were working on together, and by the time Carver had finished writing George carver and his alcoholisms impact on writing an argument in favor of death penalty in rights of execcution by louis mansor A narrative on how i almost drowned Washington Carver earns his Bachelor's degree.
Louis Mansor's Rights of Execution - Capital Punishment: For With out the death penalty families of murder victims would be delt a double blow. An Argument in Favor of Death Penalty in Rights of Execcution by Louis Mansor ( words, 2 pages) Capital Punishment For With out the death penalty families of .
Potter Stewart, Majority opinion in ruling that the death penalty is a constitutionally acceptable form of punishment for premeditated murder (July 2, ). The death penalty is not unconsitutional when imposed at the (1)discretion of a jury for the (2)crime of murder, and so long as (3)appropriate safeguards are provided against any arbitrary or capricious imposition.