регистрация / вход

Capitol Punishment Essay Research Paper Capitol PunshmentLeana

Capitol Punishment Essay, Research Paper ?Capitol Punshment? Leana King Essay 4 Prof. Ireland Nov. 31, 1999 We can not afford to disregard the importance of capitol punishment and the crimes that deserve it. People have used a number of arguments to support their position regarding the death penalty. Among the arguments employed have been deterrence, cost, retribution, incapacitation, rehabilitation and mistake.

Capitol Punishment Essay, Research Paper

?Capitol Punshment?

Leana King

Essay 4

Prof. Ireland

Nov. 31, 1999

We can not afford to disregard the importance of capitol punishment and the crimes that deserve it. People have used a number of arguments to support their position regarding the death penalty. Among the arguments employed have been deterrence, cost, retribution, incapacitation, rehabilitation and mistake. It has been suggested, though, that a person’s position on the issue of capital punishment is not determined by a rationale evaluation of the arguments for and against the death penalty, but is an emotionally based, moral opinion, that may be based on vengeance.

In 1972, the United States Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment, as it was then being administered, was being applied in an arbitrary and capricious manner which constituted cruel and unusual punishment. In its decision, the Court noted that the death penalty statutes were vague and ambiguous, providing little guidance to juries in deciding whether to apply the death penalty. Psychological research supports the idea that increased ambiguity in legal instructions can lead to discriminatory verdicts by mock juries. states required juries to consider the mitigating and aggravating factors of the crime before assigning a sentence of death. Other states, such as Texas, require that a jury be convinced that all three of the following requirements have been satisfied before imposing a sentence of death (1) that the defendant intended to kill the victim; (2) that it is likely that the defendant would commit other violent crimes in the future and (3) that the defendant did not commit the crime as a reasonable response to any provocation by the victim.

As a justification for capital punishment, deterrence is used to suggest that executing murderers will decrease the homicide rate by causing other potential murderers not to commit murder for fear of being executed themselves (”general deterrence”) ? and, of course, that the murderer who is executed will not kill again (”specific deterrence”).

The desire for vengeance or retribution is the desire to see persons suffer, or be punished, for their actions. The principles of retribution suggest that a murderer should be executed because he or she “deserves” or “has earned” the sentence of death. Those who base their opposition to the death penalty on moral grounds argue that life is sacred and killing is always wrong. people also have questioned whether we as individuals or as a society have the right to decide that another must die.

Those who support the death penalty defend it as a cost-effective alternative to life imprisonment. A 1982 study in New York concluded that the average capital murder trial and the first stage of appeals costs U.S. taxpayers 1.8 million dollars. It is estimated that this is less than it would cost to incarcerate someone for one hundred years.

In arguing for the death penalty, prosecutors have relied upon arguments such as: executions are necessary for deterrence; a sentence of death is legally appropriate; the nature of the crime was extremely abhorrent; the defendant deserves to be executed; and that the defendant lacks worth. By contrast, the defense arguments include: execution is based on the desire for vengeance and is therefore morally wrong; execution itself is equivalent to murder; the penalty of death is too severe; and that executing the defendant will not bring back the victim or end the suffering of survivors.

Support for Capitol Punishment in the Bible

A. Capital punishment was commanded by God in the Old Testament.

1. It preceded the Mosaic Law.

Gen 9:6 Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for

in the image of God He made man.

2. It was based on the dignity of man, i.e. man’s transcendent value.

Gen 9:6 Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for

in the image of God He made man.

3. It was commanded in the Mosaic Law.

a. Twenty-one different offenses called for the death penalty in the Old

Testament.

b. Only three include an actual or potential capital offense, by our

standards.

c. Six are for religious offenses.

d. Ten are for various moral issues.

e. Two relate to ceremonial issues.

4. “But King David wasn’t put to death for his capital crimes.”

a. David understood what justice demanded in this case: “As the Lord

lives, surely the man who has done this deserves to die.” 2 Sam 12:5

b. If God chose to set aside punishment, that doesn’t mean the

punishment is unjust when it is executed. God was the one who required

capital punishment in many instances.

B. Capital punishment was assumed in the New Testament.

1. God ordains governing authorities:

a. Jn 19:11 Jesus answered [to Pilate], “You would have no authority

over Me, unless it had been given you from above.”

b. Rom 13:1-2 Let every person be in subjection to the governing

authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which

exist are established by God. Therefore, he who resists authority has

opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive

condemnation upon themselves.

c. 1 Pet 2:13-14 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human

institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, or to governors

as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those

who do right.

ОТКРЫТЬ САМ ДОКУМЕНТ В НОВОМ ОКНЕ

ДОБАВИТЬ КОММЕНТАРИЙ [можно без регистрации]

Ваше имя:

Комментарий