I have a difficult time understanding the hypocritical mindset of the death penalty, the idea of taking a criminal 's life because they may have taken someone else 's. Why kill people that killed people to display that killing is wrong. I believe giving the death penalty to the criminal is giving them the easy way out of their actions. Having the criminal spend life in jail
He says "Whoever shall willfully take the life of another shall be punished by death. "He said that Pi has commited a crime and so should be punished. He concluded assertions are, of course, ahead of any duties that he had to discharge with relation to this case, but he implicated them in the case saying that Foster is still unaware of dangers implicit in the conceptions of the judicial office advocated. He concluded that the conviction should be affirmed. HANDY,
It is necessary for those who refuse to accept unjust administration of punishment. Capital punishment is often justified by saying that by executing the murders birth of new murders would be prevented. Executions especially when they are more painful and public create a sense of horror and halts those tempted towards criminality to violate laws. In countries such as Pakistan, India, Afghanistan, Nigeria and New York crime rates are exceptionally high and this affects the population there. The police also works inefficiently in these countries and the criminals easily escape from punishments.
The government works to ensure the guilty receive adequate justice for their crime, and the act of pursuing justice granted to the state by the will of the governed ensures that “[executing] a lawfully condemned prisoner” defies the label of murder (Koch). The common misconception of characterizing the death penalty as murder rejects the rights of the state which supersede those of the individual. In the government’s efforts to ensure justice to criminals for crimes committed, they have a wide variety of options available to them, and it is the job of the judge and jury to confirm that the punishment meets the crime. If the average citizen executes those they believe culprits of heinous crimes, they willfully choose the path of manslaughter over specious justice because only the government has the power and ultimate responsibility to condemn the
When a murder is committed there is not taking it back and the same goes for when an execution happens. Both cases result in the loss of human life that can’t be revived. 4) Ernest van den Haag: The death penalty in a way lets the murderer know that, what they did was deemed wrong by the community of their peers and can’t live for it(pg.235). The death penalty is a punishment that the community feels qualifies as life for a life and is justified. 5) Ernest van den Haag: Penal sanctions deemed useful long term because they form necessary consequences that help to control crime (pg.233).
I myself find that the facts supporting to abolish the death penalty outweigh any reason to continue to uphold it. With a broken judicial system leading to death row. It is littered with racial and economic hardships inadequacies and flaws innocent people are being sentenced to death court systems bottlenecked with motions and procedures that only prolong the impending doom. Many People argue that the worst of the worst of the worst should be put to death and that there is no reason to hold out with hopes that they will change. Other argue that the we must keep the death penalty for a deterrent.
¨We reserve the death penalty in the United States for the most heinous murders and the most brutal and conscienceless murderers.” I can see why the Supreme Court doesn 't want these people in prison, because they might kill somebody in prison, or if they get bailed out they wouldn 't learn their lesson and do what they were doing AGAIN. ¨We have the responsibility to punish those who deserve it, but only to the degree they deserve it.¨ I can also see why they think people deserve it for their horrible actions, they believe that since they did some outrageous murder, or a really bad crime they deserve to die. ¨"Whatever your feelings are toward the death penalty, one thing most people will never know is the pain experienced when a family member, or in my case, family members are brutally tortured and murdered.¨ This is saying that families go through a lot when a murderer kills one of their loved ones, and the family wants that person executed. Personally, the death penalty in my eyes can help families feel like they 've got justice, and make them feel like they did something for the loved one that was
According to researchers the death penalty would be very benificial to us as a society. For example the death penalty acts as a deterrent, the constitution also allows the death penalty, and the death penalty can promote happiness and well being to non offenders. So with the death penalty it could save many lifes. When a criminal gets away with murder or rape it gives them a chance to assault a second victim or even a third. Us living in a america, were born to live a good life, if we have twisted people who want to try to corrupt and kill why should we allow that?
10% of defendants sentenced to death volunteer for execution, but what about the people to sentence to die in prison. The death penalty should be a voluntary choice for all inmates/ defendants sentenced to life imprisonment, since sentencing a person to life without parole is civil death, rehabilitation is not an option for them, and many inmates prefer death over life sentences. Morality is the biggest decision maker when deciding whether to take another person’s life and will depend on the person you ask. The dilemma created from the death penalty would be utilized to assist an “inmate’s last wish”. Giving sentenced defendants the option to die counter the thought of it being a murder and closer towards assisted suicide.
The requirement that the prosecution prove mens rea means that criminal punishment won’t be applied to a person unless he or she was culpable for his or her act. Culpability arises when the defendant either knew what they were doing or what they were risking, or when they failed to reach a standard of behaviour expected of normal people. For example; Suppose A stabs B, A therefore will be culpable of murder, if his actions were intentional, or manslaughter. However what if A did not know what he was doing? Consider that when A stabbed B he did so under a delusion that he was in fact fighting with a monster of fictional sorts, and that this said delusion was caused by a mental disorder.