The death penalty is not fair because it is unconstitutional, gender biased, and inhumane. The death penalty is not fair because it is unconstitutional. The death penalty is in direct violation the 8th amendment as it states, “ Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted” ( The 8th amendment ). This is important because in the 8th amendment is says no cruel or unusual punishment but the death penalty is both of those things, making it hard for the death penalty to be seen as a good thing. The death penalty also violates the 14th amendment.
I think that Utilitarians favor exploring the alternatives because doing something to someone, even a criminal, who has committed a heinous crime, morally wrong, and two wrongs do not make a right, it is setting the wrong view for society. I do not agree with not punishing people who do wrong things. I feel that no matter how big the crime or infraction is, there must be punishment, if not then society will keep breaking the rules, and then we would live in an unsafe world, we would not have a sound mind, and be able to function,
The death penalty is an ineffective method of punishment for criminals because it is not ethical, it does not stop crime, and innocents could be killed. Firstly and most obviously, the death penalty is wrong and unethical. Lethal injection is the type of punishment most used today, goes against the constitution, and is incredibly cruel. While it is perhaps less cruel than older forms of execution, such as the electric chair, it is still very unconstitutional. In an article about lethal injection, the author states,“The current use of lethal injections constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, which is prohibited by the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution” (Lethal Injection).
This may result in wrongful convictions or acquittals and as a result, would severely undermine the efficacy of any justice system. People may start to lose trust in the justice system in meting out fair and impartial judgements, resulting in a total disregard of the justice system. In the contexts of crimes carrying the death penalty, jury tampering can have serious ramifications. The irreversible damage done to the accused’s family due to the wrongful convictions cannot be fixed with any sum of money. With Singapore’s strict anti-corruption stance, cases of corrupt judges would hence be rare.
The bench also called for deletion of section 309 of the Indian Penal Code, labelling it as cruel, irrational which results actually in punishing an individual twice. Section 309, Indian Penal Code, according to the court violates Article 21 and is therefore void. This is necessary to humanize the law. In the opinion of the court, attempted suicide are a medical and a social problem and are best dealt by non customary measures. The court emphasized that attempt to commit suicide is in reality a cry for help and not for punishment.
Surely the scale of punishment with proportionality would be overgrown if there were subsections for each type of individual. After clearly showing the problems with the arguments for the death penalty and the abstractness of the arguments against it, the author still gives no answers. Lex talionis could be the wrong way of doing things and the principle of proportionality simply says to punish proportionally to the
Only in extreme cases would the punishment of death be necessary. Although the death penalty is still a very controversial topic today, Beccaria is correct in his assertion that it is not necessary. The death penalty fails to provide a means of reforming an individual, and does not leave a lasting impression on others. Though the
Will you stand with us or against us? I do not support the death penalty for some couple of reasons. First I do not think that a human being should be able to judge a person on their crime, a person should be jailed as a punishment. If we as human decide whether a person lives or dies from a bad doing, then we are as guilty as them and are doing the same thing as them by killing them. So as a result, I in my opinion of this subject do not believe
In actuality, these individuals are just as hurtful and malicious as hate crimes are because they demonstrate irrational fears such as homophobia and xenophobia, as well as, portray a very dogmatic attitude toward people who oppose their antiquated adherences. Therefore, mankind’s passage through time seems to progress backwards from innovation and compassion when it comes to crimes of hatred, bias and prejudice. In fact, the sheer number of hate crimes that victims still continue to experience today demonstrates society’s obstinate intolerance against religion, race, origin or colour, and sexual orientation. The deliberate act of partaking in bias-motivated
4. Capital punishment has been in debate since early hangings, and will continue to be a subject of controversy untill our society identifies the irrationality of it 's existence in our judicial system. Currently capital punishment is being left up to the individual state as to whether or not they decide to implement it as a form of punishment. Advocates of this obscene form of punishment offer a handful of reasons justifying it 's use. At first glance these reasons seem to hold up, but one by one I will show you that these reasons are as ridiculous as the source they are trying to endorse.