The second-way punishment is justified is if the benefits of punishing them cannot be with less suffering or at a lower cost to those being punished. This emphasizes the Utilitarian ideal of promoting the action that makes the greatest good for the most people. Shaw lists different benefits that punishment seeks to achieve are first, to benefit society by removing the criminal in one way or another. Hence the criminal is discouraged from committing future crimes. The second way society receives help from punishment is when the punishment teaches not only the criminal but
It will be more beneficial to society as a whole if we abolish double jeopardy, to correct the mistakes of the justice system and essential for progression. Double jeopardy is the sole reason why some criminals walk free. The justice court is fallible: ineffective representation or perjury testimony would ultimately cause a wrongful conviction. Wrongful convictions are a concern of everybody, the families of the victims or the lawyers
Utilitarianism is a popular type of consequentialism, rule utilitarianism is a form of utilitarianism. Utilitarians think that happiness is the measure to judge the consequences, whether the action is right or wrong depends almost entirely on the good or bad consequences. Rule utilitarianism argues that if you obey the rules it will benefit the larger number of sentinel beings. more absolutist then relative, based on past experience. Rules generally promote the greater good, it is intended to guide us to make the best decisions for what needs to be done.
Lord Devlin’s preoccupation is for society and his theory purports to be a practical and workable moral theory for fallible human being when he says that ‘ social reformers are not as patient as philosophers and we have not waited for minority groups to attain moral integrity” and that those who over emphasize individual freedom fail to realize that “the pimps leading the weak astray far outnumber spiritual explores at the head of the strong” whereas Professor H.L.A Hart’s primary concern goes to the freedom and right of self-determination of the individual and a lesser value on tradition and public opinion. It is clear that their approach to morality is different, where Lord Devlin is looking for consensual morality meanwhile Professor H.L.A Hart is concerned with amalgamation of moralities.
To him this shows the higher morality that the jurors exhibited and the superior wisdom they showed. But to Alder the jury system is in jeopardy and in need to be fixed and reformed in order for it to continue to look like the ideal. Even though Alder holds the idea of nullification in such high regard he sees that in practice it produces bad and “patently stupid--verdicts that frequently resulted.” The jury system has fallen from its glory. In Alder’s eyes the biggest problem the jury system has is not the jury itself but the process of jury selection and the best way to reform the process is by eliminate peremptory challenges altogether.
Despite the disputes and controversies its potential capacity of regulating moral conflicts in a modern world is underestimated. Society is in the position to implement this strong moral act to show that there is no way to escape the consequences of wrongful deeds. The benefits of elimination of dangerous criminal elements, deterrence, reduced incarceration, shortening of sentence expenses and the safety of the community are the result of capital punishment implementation. . Even though, changes should be introduced to the system of penalty to adjust it to the needs of each particular community, it is still one of the most effective measures of combating and prevention of the crime.
Reflected in many of the most important policy decisions of today is the philosophy of Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is the moral idea that “what is right (or a duty) is whatever maximizes the total amount of net utility.” Utilitarianism, at the time of its introduction, was a revolutionary moral philosophy. This is because utilitarianism underscores the idea that the consequences of a person’s actions are the most morally significant. So it is not the agent’s well-being that is morally significant, but instead the maximum well-being of others In terms of public policy, politicians often use utilitarianism in the form of “cost-benefit analysis” in order to make decisions. Cost-benefit analysis uses utility to “approximate the principle that
They do this, be that as it may, as indicated by altogether different thinking. The logic of Deontology presents the best proof for the profound quality of the death penalty. This is on account of the retributive hypothesis still regards the mankind of the criminal. By rebuffing the criminal, we are conflicting with the criminal's desires right then and there, however by and large we are regarding their opportunity in the decisions that they made. The administration recognizes both the choice that went with specific activities and the duty of that individual for those activities.
Aristotle defined a virtue as a good habit formed by rationally shaping one’s desires in order to reach a mean between overreaction and under reaction (Prof. Skerker). Virtues are only acquired through the habituation of doing the right things voluntarily. Aristotle also believed that a person doing the right thing and reaching the mean of a virtue should be brought pleasure by their actions. In a class discussion we defined character as the sum of all of our virtues, combined with how we use those virtues to influence our decisions and actions. The virtues I found most applicable in this case study are: integrity, humility, and loyalty.
One of the first principle based approaches discussed is called utilitarianism. Gibson describes it as “The significant element of an act is the amount of good or evil it produces” (Gibson 30). In this ethical idea, actions are right as long as it promotes the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Going back to the Bhopal incident, a utilitarianist would respond in a way of disgust considering the thousands that had been killed, versus the number of workers that kept the severity of the situation at hand a secret for their own welfare. Another approach is the ethical theory of deontology, which is the opposite of utilitarianism.