The late, Louis Pojman, was a great American philosopher, who was known for his many writings such as A Defense of the Death Penalty. The death penalty has always been a very touchy subject for most people. People have their views of what they consider right or wrong. Philosopher Pojman was pro-death penalty, so naturally he had some who agreed with him and some that did not. As I read the “Best Bet” argument my opinion of murderers is that they deserve to be killed for their horrid actions. Pojman uses emotion to prove his argument very well. Pojman made many wise analogies throughout his writings. He put things into a perspective everyone could understand. I can see that he makes a very strong case by using the Bible to back up his views. …show more content…
He believes “that to bet against capital punishment is to bet against the innocent and for the murderer” (Pojman 144). Pojman thinks that if the murderers are given a long prison sentence than the murderers win. I agree because, when the murder kills they lose their right to live. Pojman writes that, “…human beings… have dignity, one who with malice aforethought kills a human being forfeits his right to life and deserves to die [sic]” (Pojman 140). The United States should have the death penalty because it would keep murderers from killing again. Pojman uses the analogy if someone committed murder, they would be struck and killed instantly by lightning because by taking another life they forfeited theirs. I find that the following two points from Pojman provides a valid argument as of why we should have the death penalty. He states if we choose a policy of having the death penalty and “… we’re right, we have saved the lives of the innocent. If we are wrong, unfortunately, we’ve sacrificed the lives of some murderers.” (Pojman 144). We should choose the death penalty because I see it as taking a precaution to stop someone from taking any more innocent lives. Executing the murderers is the only way justice can be given to the person who was murdered and their families. If people knew that they would be killed themselves for murdering someone they would not do it because they would not want to
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Editor Anna Quindlen wrote many articles and essays conveying her opinion toward the death penalty. Such as, “Death Penalty Fails to Equal Retribution” and “Public & Private; The High Cost of Death”. Although Anna Quindlen makes many valuable accusations regarding her reasoning to being opposed to the death penalty, she undermines the real purpose of the penalty itself. The Death penalty, is indeed necessary. Many of the accusations Anna proclaims permit to the emotions of the victims families that have been robbed of their loved one by the said killer.
Pojman’s argument against the objections to capital punishment is not completely valid. If we understand the human being, we can also understand that humans are spiteful people and many people are filled with the hopes of revenge. Therefore, the thirst of revenge could potentially be a contributing factor as to why people are for the death penalty. Even if Pojman doesn’t believe in revenge, it should not be a valid reason for him to ignore its potential in justice and decision making during trials. This world is already filled with bitterness towards one another and we, as a society, cannot stop it because we all have different morals.
In the article, “The Death Penalty: An Opinion Essay,” written by Hamilton Spectator, states that is the first issue that he mentions is that the justice system is never 100% right all the time. While other situations can be changed by a judge a death penalty is unchangeable. Various times of similar crimes are conferred and diverse sentences are given out. As well as depending on the criminals race the consequences valid on the judge 's opinion.
Joshua Marquis is neither a scholar, a jurist, or a crusader for the wrongly accused. Instead he has spent most of his time as a prosecutor. His essay is written from a personal point of view where he supports the death penalty; however, his essay is unlike the average supporter. Joshua Marquis believes capital punishment should be decided based on the following: each case on its own, within its own context, using the specific facts of the case, considering the community where the crime occurred and the background of the defendants. With that being said, Marquis believes that for certain cases the death penalty is appropriate.
The essay, “Death and Justice: How Capital Punishment Affirms Life”, written by Edward I. Koch is written to persuade the reader to accept the favor of the death penalty. The writer not only states a variety of facts, but he also tries to generate sorrow or even anger at times. He expresses different topics that lead to these emotions throughout the text by using ethos, pathos, and logos. Koch was successful at making the reader favor the death penalty not only because he used these techniques, but he also kept the reading concise. Another solid reasoning that Edward I. Koch uses that mixes with the internal emotions is pathos.
Igor Primoratz sets forth an argument that to ensure justice in the legal system the utilization of capital punishment is necessary. According to Primoratz there is no punishment of any equivalence to that of murder, whereas for less severe crimes fines and prison time is reasonable. Primoratz argument consists of three defences to common feedback to the action of capital punishment. The one that was most appealing to me being whether it violates the right to life. To this he responds that when the took the life of another human they lost this right; as these right are only given to those who respect the rights of others.
In the debate two candidate for death penalty were Robert Blecker and Kent Scheidegger. They argument by saying that Everyone wants a neighborhood that 's safe and communities that are strong. And in order to do that, we have to focus on the root causes of crime and punish the criminals proportional to their crime that is the Hammurabi code “An Eye for an eye”. Robert Blecker said, let the punishment fit the crime and The closest we come to serious punishment left in this society is the death penalty. He said he would reserve the death penalty for essentially terrorists, mass murderers, murderers of vulnerable victims, especially children, rapist murderers, contract killers, and torture killers.
There has been much controversy over capital punishment over the years. Few people in the United States see capital punishment as being wrong. It is said that Canada is way too easy on their criminals because they do not punish the convicts by the death penalty. Canada says that the United States is way to strict on their criminals because they execute their convicts by the death penalty. Should murderers be murdered for their crimes or should they spend the rest of their lives perishing in prison, that question may soon some day be correctly answered but for now it is strictly your own belief, possibly this essay may change your mind if you are for the death penalty.
(3). A philosophical belief about the capital punishment to observe the financial impracticality of the system because leaders should begin an investigation to determine the cost of the death penalty system. They could make a more informed choice about whether to keep it for sentences for life without
Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, and the debate about its abolition is the largest point of the essay written by Steve Earle, titled "A Death in Texas”. This form of punishment should be abolished for 3 reasons; First, It does not seem to have a direct effect on deterring murder rates, It has negative effects on society, and is inconsistent with American ideals. To begin, the death penalty is unnecessary since it is ineffective at deterring rates of murder. In fact, 88% of the country's top criminologists do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent to homicide, according to the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. In opposition, supporters may argue that it may indeed help to deter murder rates as they have
Capital Punishment Punishment is the imposition of a penalty as retribution for a crime, and the retribution deserves those who do the crime. The main idea of this chapter is whether the killer deserves to die or not, and we ought to kill them or not. Stephen Nathanson argues against the punishment that leads to execution. He said that the actual and moral beliefs based on the death penalty are wrong and must be repealed. Many people said that the death penalty is the best way to deter murder and thus save lives.
The Death Penalty, loss of life due to previous crimes and actions, is believed by some to be extremely costly, inhumane, and cruel unlike some others whom believe it is just, right, and provides closure. The Death Penalty is not a quick and easy process. Most who get sentenced to deaths row wait years for their ultimate punishment of death. Some believe that it is not right to punish and kill a human for actions they have done because, they believe that the inmate should have another chance. Then others believe that it is right to punish someone for their actions especially if their actions involve killing another or multiple humans.
Death Penalty According to the 2010 Gallup Poll, 64% of the United State of America are supporting the death penalty, I as an American am part of that 36% that is against it. I do not believe that we as human being should determine whether another person should live or die. A second reason that I am against the death penalty is for the reason that the accused person could be innocent and normally the accused person only has one court presentation and is only judged by the judge not a jury of their peer, and is sent to death row where they pay for a crime that they haven’t done. My final reason that i do not believe that the death penalty should count as a punishment for the American people is because, a person that has done a massive massacre shouldn’t just be able to leave the world just like that without paying and suffering for what they have done, Or should the death punishment continue as it is for it has a great benefit to us as citizens of the United States.