Capital Punishment - Kameron Middleton, University Of Memphi ✓ Solved
Capital Punishmentkameron Middletonuniversity Of Memphiscapita
Capital punishment is the act of executing criminals of specific crimes after proper legal trials have been concluded. Only the state has powers to execute a person. Non-state organizations cannot execute a person. When they do so, it is considered murder.
The crimes that warrant capital punishment are those that are very serious such as certain types of murder, treason, adultery, rape, and certain types of fraud. These are known as capital crimes. Many countries around the world use capital punishment. The death penalty has been abolished in some countries, which is why they cannot use execution. China leads when it comes to executing people.
China is closely followed by Iran, the USA, and Saudi Arabia. The United States has a constitutional ban against any punishments that are cruel or unusual. Execution is considered an unusual punishment that is also cruel. The state does not have the right to kill human beings. If anything, the state has to protect its citizens.
Execution is a capital punishment that comes with premeditation and ceremony, which is why most people consider it inhuman. There has been a lot of dilemma surrounding the topic of capital punishment. The question of whether the death penalty should be legal or illegal still remains unsolved. The aim of this paper is to carefully examine capital punishment, determine the pros and cons of capital punishment, and what can be done to protect human rights as well as ensure criminals are held accountable and deterred from committing further crimes.
Paper For Above Instructions
Capital punishment, often referring to the death penalty, raises a multifaceted debate that spans ethics, legality, and social implications. The continued practice of capital punishment in various parts of the world, including the United States, represents a significant societal dilemma. Historically, capital punishment has been viewed as a necessary measure for punishing severe crimes such as murder, treason, and certain sexual offenses. However, the method's moral legitimacy is increasingly scrutinized in modern legal and social frameworks (Donohue, 2016).
This paper will explore the complexities of capital punishment, emphasizing the necessity of examining both its advantages and disadvantages. While some proponents argue that it serves as a deterrent against heinous crimes, detractors claim that it violates fundamental human rights and poses the risk of irreversible errors, such as executing an innocent individual (Goel & Mazhar, 2019).
One significant argument favoring capital punishment is the belief in retributive justice. Advocates assert that individuals who commit capital offenses deserve the ultimate punishment, enhancing the concept of justice for victims and their families. The underlying principle is that certain crimes are so egregious that the perpetrator forfeits their right to life (Sarat, 2018). Moreover, the notion of deterrence is frequently cited as a justification, with the argument that the death penalty discourages others from committing similar offenses.
However, the deterrence argument remains highly contested. Numerous studies suggest that there is minimal evidence to support the claim that capital punishment significantly deters crime compared to life imprisonment. For example, Kovarsky (2016) indicates that states with the death penalty do not necessarily experience lower crime rates than those without it. This leads to questions regarding the effectiveness and justification of state-sanctioned executions as a means of crime prevention.
Another critical concern surrounding capital punishment is the potential for wrongful convictions. The legal system is not infallible, and there have been documented cases where innocent individuals have been sentenced to death. According to Rubin (2016), the irreversible nature of capital punishment makes the stakes exceptionally high; even one wrongful execution undermines the integrity of the judicial system and raises ethical concerns about the government's role in taking life.
The application of capital punishment is often inconsistent, influenced by factors such as socioeconomic status, race, and geographic location. Moreland and Watson (2016) highlight that minorities and economically disadvantaged individuals are disproportionately represented on death row, signaling systemic biases that question the discretionary practices in sentencing. This disparity contributes to the failure of capital punishment to operate as an impartial mechanism of justice.
From a human rights perspective, many argue that state-sanctioned execution contradicts the right to life as outlined in various international treaties and conventions. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person. The intentional termination of a human life, regardless of the circumstances, is viewed by many as a gross violation of this fundamental right (Udoudom, Idagu, & Nwoye, 2018).
In light of these arguments, many countries have begun to reconsider their stance on capital punishment. A significant number of nations have abolished the death penalty or placed moratoriums on its use, citing moral, ethical, and practical concerns. The trend reflects a broader societal shift towards rehabilitating offenders rather than exacting retribution via execution (Seeds, 2018).
Nonetheless, those advocating for the retention of capital punishment suggest that strict guidelines, oversight, and advancements in forensic technology could mitigate the risk of wrongful executions. They propose comprehensive reviews of capital cases to ensure fairness and accuracy in sentencing while striving to uphold justice for victims (McRae, 2017).
Ultimately, the ongoing debate surrounding capital punishment necessitates a thorough evaluation of its moral implications, effectiveness as a deterrent, and inherent risks to human life. Various stakeholders, including policymakers, legal professionals, and ethicists, must work collaboratively to forge a balanced approach that adequately addresses public safety while upholding the sanctity of human life.
The conversation surrounding capital punishment is emblematic of broader societal values and the evolution of justice. By critically examining the historical context, legal ramifications, and ethical considerations of capital punishment, this paper aims to contribute to the ongoing dialogue regarding its future in criminal justice systems.
References
- Donohue, J. J. (2016). Empirical analysis and the fate of capital punishment. Duke J. Const. L. & Pub. Poly, 11, 51.
- Goel, R. K., & Mazhar, U. (2019). Does capital punishment deter white-collar crimes? The World Economy, 42(6).
- Kovarsky, L. (2016). Muscle memory and the local concentration of capital punishment. Duke LJ, 66, 259.
- McRae, D. (2017). Indonesian capital punishment from a comparative perspective. Bijdragen tot de Taal-, land-en volkenkunde/Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences of Southeast Asia, 173(1), 1-22.
- Moreland, A., & Watson, D. (2016). Women’s representation and capital punishment. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 37(4).
- Rubin, A. T. (2016). Penal change as penal layering: A case study of proto-prison adoption and capital punishment reduction, 1785–1822. Punishment & Society, 18(4).
- Sarat, A. (2018). When the state kills: Capital punishment and the American condition. Princeton University Press.
- Seeds, C. (2018). Disaggregating LWOP: Life without parole, capital punishment, and mass incarceration in Florida, 1972–1995. Law & Society Review, 52(1).
- Udoudom, M. D., Idagu, U. A., & Nwoye, L. (2018). Kantian and Utilitarian Ethics on Capital Punishment. Journal of Sustainable Society, 7(1), 5-11.
- Wilson, J. P., & Rule, N. O. (2016). Hypothetical sentencing decisions are associated with actual capital punishment outcomes: The role of facial trustworthiness. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(4).