|
| |
IMMORALITY OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT.
Term Paper ID:28615
|
|
|
Essay Subject:
Discusses findings on deterrence, social issues. Argues current death penalty system is unfair & morally wrong.... More...
|
4 Pages / 900 Words
4 sources, 8 Citations,
MLA Format
$16.00
Return to List of Papers
|
Paper Abstract:
Discusses findings on deterrence, social issues. Argues current death penalty system is unfair & morally wrong.
Paper Introduction:
Capital punishment is immoral and has not been proven to be effective. It is immoral because it denies the basic principle it is meant to uphold (that human life is precious). In addition, the evidence referenced in this study shows that the death penalty does not deter individuals from committing crimes for which they night be sentenced to death. The death penalty is also unfairly applied, based on race and socioeconomics, among other factors. The only argument which can still be effectively pressed by pro-capital punishment forces is that it is an effective retributive action against those convicted of capital crimes.
With respect to the question of deterrence, Radelet and Akers report on their efforts "to determine if there is consensus among expert criminologists on whether the death
Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.
Between 193 and 199 , 4, 16 persons were executed in the United States. With respect to the question of deterrence, Radelet and Akers reporton their efforts "to determine if there is consensus among expertcriminologists on whether the death penalty has been, is, or could be ageneral deterrent to criminal homicide." Their conclusions are based onsurveys of "67 of the 7 current and former presidents of threeprofessional criminology organizations: The American Society ofCriminology, Academy ofCriminal Justice Sciences, and Law and Society Association." They find that Over 8 percent of these experts believe the existing research fails to support a deterrence justification for capital punishment. . Killing is justified when it is done in self-defense. Sparks and flames erupted ... Some defenders ofcapital punishment argue that the severity of the punishment should matchthe severity of the crime. It lasted thirty seconds. "The Case Against The Death Penalty."http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~critcrim/dp/dppapers/aclu.antidp November 12, 2 .Carmical, Casey. . This leaves the moral/religious question. When we remove the question of deterrence from the table, the bestargument for the death penalty is that it is a retributive measure againstthe criminal. "Deterrence and the DeathPenalty: The Views of the Experts."http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~critcrim/dp/dppapers/mike.deterence November 12, 2 .----------------------- 7 A large puff of grayish smoke and sparks poured out from under the hood that covered Mr. Evans' face. (Radelet and Akers). The results of our research show that the question of whether or not the death penalty can reduce criminal violence, at least in the eyes of the presidents of the major scholarly societies in criminology, is a settled issue. Radelet and Akers note that while other arguments for or against thedeath penalty can continue to fairly be made and considered, this area is aclosed issue as far as they are concerned: . . Bedau writes thatracial discrimination was one of the bases used by the Supreme Court inruling the death penalty unconstitutional. Of these, 2,129 (or 53 percent) were black. In addition, the evidencereferenced in this study shows that the death penalty does not deterindividuals from committing crimes for which they night be sentenced todeath. Bedau quotes another researcherwho wrote in 1944) that "the South makes the widest application of thedeath penalty, and Negro criminals come in for much more than their shareof the executions." Bedau adds, however, that statistics confirm this discrimination, only it is not confined to the South. The only argument which can still beeffectively pressed by pro-capital punishment forces is that it is aneffective retributive action against those convicted of capital crimes. In support of his moral argument, Carmical says the death penalty ishumanely carried out. As John McAdams, Professor of Marquette University'sDepartment of Political Science, writes, If we execute murderers and there is in fact no deterrent effect, we have killed a bunch of murderers. "If We Execute Murders." http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/ November 12, 2 .Radelet, Michael L., and Ronald L. The studies examined by Radelet and Akers make clear it is not adeterrent and that it is unfairly applied. Death penalty opponents (hereafter "opponents") would like us to believe otherwise. . These results chisel away at one of themost important justifications for the death penalty in modernsociety" (Radelet and Akers). In September 1984, all criminologists at the University of Florida released a statement saying that the empirical research on the death penalty did not support the deterrence hypothesis: " . has been clearly answered by numerous research projects conducted over the last 5 years. Murder is "the unlawful and malicious or premeditated killing of one human being by another." Kill and murder are not interchangeable terms. . This, to me, is not a tough call (McAdams). . In addition, poverty marks those who are executed: "Approximatelyninety percent of those on death row could not afford to hire a lawyer whenthey were tried" and "A defendant's poverty, lack of firm social roots inthe community, inadequate legal representation at trial or on appeal--allthese have been common factors among death-row populations." JusticeWilliam O. The death penalty does not punish people for killing, but for murder. . Carmical, for the pro-deathpenalty side, notes the anti-death penalty slogan: "We kill people to showpeople that killing people is wrong." Carmical writes: First of all, the slogan misses an important point. The only argument for capitalpunishment is the cold-blooded and vengeance-driven argument that it is aneffective way to punish a criminal, which it obviously is. . Killing means to cause death. Two doctors examined Mr. Evans and declared that he was not dead (Bedau). If it were so, legal incarceration would be equated with kidnapping, lovemaking with rape, self-defense with assault, etc.1 Therefore, the slogan is better stated, "We execute people to show people that murder is wrong." Not quite as catchy, is it? Just because two actions result in the same end does not make them morally equivalent. Capital punishment is immoral and has not been proven to beeffective. "The Death Penalty: Morally Defensible?" http://web.utk.edu/~jcarmica/cbc/capital.html November 12, 2 .McAdams. . An overpowering stench of burnt flesh and clothing began pervading the witness room. Akers. . However, as the system exists today, justretribution for a convicted murderer does not exist, because the deathpenalty is unjustly administered to different murderers. However, Bedau writes of John Evans' execution inAlabama: The first jolt of 19 volts of electricity passed through Mr. Evans' body. (Carmical). . Unlike the question ofdeterrence, which can be argued based on more quantitative bases, the moralargument (i.e., that the death penalty is either right or wrong based onprinciples and mores) is not quantifiable. If we fail to execute murderers, and doing so would in fact have deterred other murders, we have allowed the killing of a bunch of innocent victims. The death penalty is also unfairly applied, based on race andsocioeconomics, among other factors. It is immoral because it denies the basic principle it is meantto uphold (that human life is precious). The argument can be made by those against capital punishment thatlife in prison is a worse punishment even than death, but the retribution-based argument remains the simplest and clearest pro-death penaltyargument. I would much rather risk the former. These findings, based on academic studies carried out by the nation'smajor criminologists, support the argument that "the death penalty does, orcan do, little to reduce rates of criminalviolence in our society. Douglas wrote, "One searches our chronicles in vain for theexecution of any member of the affluent strata in this society" (Bedau). from the electrode tied to Mr. Evans' left leg. For the crime of murder, 3,343 were executed; 1,693 (or 51 percent) were black. His body slammed against the straps holding him in the electric chair and his fist clenched permanently. . Such a hideous description shows that the death penalty is clearlynot moral. [W]hether or not the death penalty reduces the homicide rate . Bedau writes that both sides in the capital punishment debate agreethat the criminal must be punished, and that a vicious murderer must bepunished at least as harshly as any other criminal. During these years African-Americans were about 12 per cent of the nation's population (Bedau). Works CitedBedau, Hugo Adam. . . John. . As criminologists at [Florida's] leading university, we feel a professional and ethical responsibility to report that there is no credible scientific research that supports the contention that the threat or use of the death penalty is or has been a deterrent to homicide (Radelet and Akers).
If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:
or
Click here to request an essay written just for you.
|
|
|
