Behind this reasoning, if an individual had committed a murder, that person’s punishment should ultimately be death itself. Both Pojman and van den Haag truly believe that retributivism helps protect our social order, and helps by eliminating the chances of vigilante justice. All guilty individuals deserve to be punished in proportion to the severity of their crime they had committed. This states that real justice requires people to suffer for their own wrongdoings, and to suffer in a way that is appropriate for the crime. For example, if murders are sentenced to death and are executed, potential murders will double think before killing another for the fear of losing their own lives.
The death penalty is a form of justice and has been implemented on persons who commit certain crimes, in order to maintain balance in the justice system. In support of this, the death penalty would prevent and deter other persons from committing these certain crimes. As a result, these certain crimes may decrease in quantity and happen a lot less frequently, which could be beneficial to the public and possibly for the long term. Along with this, the death penalty would allow anyone who may have been affected by the crimes committed, to feel closure and allow them to feel like justice has been served. For that reason, the death penalty may be considered necessary, and prove to be somewhat
Juveniles that have committed grave crimes should be charged as an adult. Although it is argued that their minds have not fully developed, it should not act as a reason to lessen their punishment. Minors should be able to differentiate between right and wrong, and must hold responsibility for their ultimate decision. Grave crimes that juveniles cause will also affect the victim’s family and friends. The impact they leave upon them will stay throughout their lives, permanently changing a part of their minds.
Additionally, people argue that a reasonable punishment for a person that has taken the life of another is “an eye for an eye.” However, taking a man’s life as a form of justice is wrong. Therefore, the government should ban capital punishment and come together to create a different way to seek justice. Can capital punishment be reversed? Everybody makes mistakes. For example, if a jury wrongly convicts a person of murder and the person is sentenced to life in prison, the jury can immediately have the conviction overturned and the person will be released.
However, since the weapon of choice is cruelty, it 's so subjective and therefore would only result in involuntary manslaughter. Since most are underage, juvenile detention seems beyond 'soft ' for that type of crime. It seems like with the information we have today, knowing full well what cruelty and bullying can do, it should be looked at as a weapon. Like a kid that picks up a handgun and shoots someone, it seems like bullying should indeed be looked at in the same way and the consequences should coincide
Specific and general are two forms of deterrence (National Police Committee). Specific deterrence leans more towards punishing a criminal for his or her crimes in hopes that they will not commit another crime in the near future. General deterrence is to prevent such crimes from occurring in the first place (National Police Committee). In addition, the public openly knowing that the state can institute and practice the death penalty “serves to deter others from committing capital crimes to avoid similar punishment” (National Police
For the past years there has been a debate on whether juveniles should be tried as life without parole or life with parole. In my opinion juveniles who commit first or second degree murder should not receive a mandatory sentence to life without parole. Although the juveniles are underage they are well informed of what’s right and what’s wrong, but some of them have difficulty understanding of what they are doing at the moment of the crime because they are angry and act before thinking clearly. I agree with the majority of supreme court justices who believe that mandatory life sentences are unconstitutional, unfair and inhumane because juveniles are immature, their brain is not completely developed, and they are unaware of long term impact
A child who commits a horrible mistake should not have to pay for it and endure the consequences for the rest of his life. Juveniles who have senselessly committed have been punished with a life sentence with no chance of parole and no chance of rehabilitation. The fact that jury’s and judges are giving juveniles life in prison instead of giving them a chance of remorse and recovery is not just and should be changed. There is a huge difference between a child who commits murder mindlessly and a child who is mentally ill and needs serious help. Therefore, there should be a different consequence for each of them.
However, many see certain crimes too punishable and do not wish to coddle a kid and let them get away with things such as murder. It may be best to lock up murderers, but we must take into consideration all the factors and what sentencing life to a new
Juvenile should be given charges equal to adults when it come to certain crimes, like murder. Whether a juvenile or an adult, a person has a full understanding of their actions, unless their mentally disturb but that 's not the subject. Young teens and children committing heinous crimes with full awareness. “Some persons will shin crime even if we do nothing to deter them, while others will seek it out even if we do everything to reform them. Wicked people exist.
I think sending a teen or adult to prison for life is not cruel or unusual for a punishment. I think that if they don 't go to jail, they will never learn. I think what 's cruel and unusual is them killing someone else. I think letting a killer walk free is like stabbing yourself in the back. This is why I disagree with Yee 's bill.
Most people tend to critique adults and Juveniles differently and similar depending on the subject that is being discussed. What happens when they commit a crime should they be treated equally or should one be given a break because they are less experienced. In a case on June 25, 2012 the subject, whether a juvenile should receive a life sentence arose in the Supreme court. This Conflict leads me to believe that Juveniles should receive the life sentence they truly deserve not based on their age or their status of their mentality, but it should be based on the damage that they caused. Some people give sympathy to the juveniles who were raised in tough neighborhoods and argue that some teenagers grew up with crime around them, that they