Capital Punishment: For and Against - Research Paper Example

? Capital Punishment Capital Punishment Sharp (1997) has pointed out that “approximately 5900 persons have been sentenced to death and 358 executed (from 1973-96) in Untied States (See appendix for more details). Moreover, a record number of 56 murderers were executed in 1995 alone in America” (Sharp, 1997). Michigan, Alaska, Hawaii, Oregon, District of Columbia, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Maine, North Dakota, Minnesota, West Virginia, Iowa, and Vermont are the American states/places in which death penalty is prohibited. In all the other American states, death penalty is legal. The arguments in favor and against capital punishment is growing day by day. Even some of the most civilized countries like America has no problems in executing hardcore criminals. However, majority of the religions argue against capital punishment. Religions are of the view that it is ethically or morally wrong to take the life of a person. According to religious point of view, all the living things and nonliving things are the creations of the God and only the God has the authority to take back the lives he created in this world. On the other hand, many atheists and sociologists are of the view that capital punishment is necessary to save the life of innocent people from the threat of antisocial elements. In their opinion, if the execution of one person may save many lives, then it should be implemented without any worry or concern. I have conducted two interviews; one with a Christian priest who argues against capital punishment and another with a sociologist who argue in favor of capital punishment in order to get more insights about this controversial topic. This paper analyses arguments in favor and against capital punishment based on those interviews and ethical theories with respect to this topic. Arguments against capital punishment based on the interview with a priest In response to my questions about the morality of capital punishment, the priest has told me that human do not have the authority to take a life which he is unable to create. In his opinion, the secrets behind life before birth and life after death are still unknown to the people even after huge advancements in science and technology. Human abilities have limitations in understanding the mission of God. According to the priest each person is sent to this world with a mission by the God and doing something against the mission of the God is unethical. In reply to the Priest’s arguments, I asked him; “Is it ethical to allow the criminals to take the life of others freely?. He replied that punishment is necessary for avoiding criminal activities however, the essence of punishment should be correction rather than vengeance. “Capital punishment never allows a criminal to change his behavior as in the case of other forms of punishments”(10 Pros and Cons of Capital Punishment, 2010). He told me that life term is more acceptable than capital punishment since it prevent us from committing the same mistake as committed by the criminal. The priest strengthened his argument with the help of some of the existing laws in America. He has pointed out that “American criminal justice system believes that “partisan advocacy of both sides on a case will promote the ultimate objective that the guilty be convicted and the innocent go free” (Ferdic et al, 2008, p.37). He has pointed out that the chances of executing an innocent person because of circumstantial evidences or fabricated evidences are more and in such cases, nobody can return the life of that person even if he has found to be innocent later. In order to substantiate that argument, he has quoted the facts published by Van den Haag. “In a recent survey Professors Hugo Adam Bedau and Michael Radelet found that 7000 persons were executed in the United States between 1900 and 1985 and that 35 were innocent of capital crimes” (Van den Haag, 1986). In other words, 35 innocent people lost their lives because of capital punishment. He has pointed that the essence of American criminal justice system is that even if thousands of criminals escaped, not even a single innocent should be punished. I asked whether any instances are existing in which capital punishment can be implemented. The priest replied that under no circumstances capital punishment can be justified because of the huge value associated with every human life. He has quoted an opinion expressed in an article to strengthen his argument; “If we execute a person, what is the difference between us and the criminal who has committed the horrifying crime of killing another individual”(10 Pros and Cons of Capital Punishment, 2010). Arguments in favor of capital punishment based on the interview with a sociologist The sociologist has taken an entirely opposite view with respect to capital punishment. In response to question related to the justification of capital punishment, life of the innocent people is more important than the life of the criminal. In his opinion, people should obey certain laws in order to sustain a society in a healthy manner. In his opinion, hardcore criminals will never change their behavior even if we give them second or third chance. He asked me whether I believe that either Saddam or Osama may change their behavior if we allow given them five or ten years jail term. He has pointed out that majority of the current criminal activities are performed because of the awareness that a criminal can escape from severe punishments with the help of expert lawyers. In his opinion, capital punishment will force a criminal to think twice of thrice before committing a serious crime. He has quoted the opinions of Van den Haag in order to substantiate his argument in favor of death penalty. “Distribution, Miscarriages of information and Deterrence are often cited as reasons to justify death penalty. Equality is morally less important than justice and justice is independent of distributional inequalities” (Van den Haag, 1986). Both equality and justice are travelling in opposite directions. He explained that if we leave criminals alive in the name of equality, innocent people may not get justice as their lives will keep on losing. So equality cannot be equated against justice while analyzing capital punishment. I asked about the possibility of avoiding capital punishment in certain exceptional cases. The sociologist quoted the opinion of Ferdic et al to reply my question; “partisan advocacy of both sides on a case will promote the ultimate objective that the guilty be convicted and the innocent go free” (Ferdic et al, 2008, p.37). He has argued that guilt needs punishment under all circumstances. However, he has pointed out that if the court is convinced by the repentance of a criminal, it can consider the replacement of death penalty by life term. Ethical theory related to the argument of the priest According to Kantian ethical theories, “even a person guilty of murder is to be treated with a certain sort of dignity, because even the murderer is still a person -- still an end in himself” (Stairs, n.d). Kant argued that humanity should be taken into the account while we analyses the morality of an action, even if it is a wrong action. In his opinion, human cannot behave like animals since he has elements of humanity and morality. Capital punishment is unadvisable according to Kantian ethics since it is a kind of taking revenge rather than giving the human an opportunity for correction. According to Kant punishments should always be provided as a response to guilt. Society’s protection should never be a motive while analyzing a guilt. In other words, Kant completely rejected the ideas of utilitarianism. In short, capital punishment is completely unacceptable according to Kantian ethics. Ethical theory related to the argument of the sociologist One of the most popular ethical theory; “Utilitarianism says “do the best you can—actually achieve the best outcome available given your opportunities, resources, skills, knowledge, and so on””(House, 2007, p.2). In other words, utilitarianism justifies all the actions based on the utility it provides to the society. Giving death penalty to criminals will help the society to reduce crimes and also to reduce the threats to the lives of innocent people. “Utilitarianism firstly expounded by Jeremy Bentham, says moral actions are those which produce, the greatest happiness of the greatest number of people” (Discuss the idea that capital punishment is only justified because criminals are permanently disabled of causing harm, 2011). Since the execution of a criminal reduces the threats to the lives of many innocent people, capital punishment can be justified when we analyze it with respect to utilitarianism. Life of more people is more important than the life of one person, especially that of a criminal. Personal opinion I strongly believe that life term is better than capital punishment. Capital punishment never gives a second chance to the criminal to correct his behavior. It is quite possible that a criminal may kill another person because of momentary loss of control over emotions. Later, he may feel repentance. In a civilized society like ours, it is better to give a second chance to a criminal to correct his behavior. Until the authorities were convinced by the changes in behavior of the criminal, he can be kept in the prison. It is quite possible that a criminal may realize the depth of the mistake he committed later in his life. If he realizes it, it is better to provide him one more chance. “One of the studies has shown that capital punishment is around 70% expensive compared to non death penalty cases or life imprisonment cases” (Pros and Cons of the Death Penalty (Capital Punishment), 2009). Capital punishment is expensive than life term since the lengthy trial procedure required for declaring capital punishment requires the services of advocates, juries, forensic experts, investigating officers etc. In other words, it is economical to keep the criminal in jails rather than taking his life. So, I do believe that capital punishment should be avoided. References 1. 10 Pros and Cons of Capital Punishment, (2010), Retrieved from http://www.buzzle.com/articles/10-pros-and-cons-of-capital-punishment.html 2. Discuss the idea that capital punishment is only justified because criminals are permanently disabled of causing harm, (2011), Retrieved from http://www.mindrelief.net/capital_punishment.html 3. House R. (2007), The Death Penalty and the Principle of Goodness, Retrieved from http://principleofgoodness.net/files/papers/death-policy-US-paper.pdf 4. History of the Death Penalty & Recent Developments. (2009). University of Alaska Anchorage, Justice Centre. Retrieved from http://justice.uaa.alaska.edu/death/history.html 5. Ferdico J N, Fradella H F & Totten C D. (2008). Criminal Procedure for the Criminal Justice Professional. Wadsworth Cengage Learning, Tenth Edition 6. Pros and Cons of the Death Penalty (Capital Punishment) (2009). Retrieved from http://uspolitics.about.com/od/deathpenalty/i/death_penalty.htm> 7. Sharp D.(1997). Death Penalty And Sentencing Information. Retrieved from http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/dp.html 8. Stairs. A. (n.d.), Kant on Capital Punishment, Retrieved from http://stairs.umd.edu/140/kantcap.html 9. Van den Haag E. (1986). The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense. Retrieved from www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/angel/procon/haagarticle.html Appendix (History of the Death Penalty & Recent Developments) Read More