Beccaria's Argument Against Capital Punishment

Capital punishment is a difficult subject for a lot of people because many question whether or not it is ethical to kill a convicted criminal. In order to critically analyze whether or not it is ethical, I will look at the issue using a utilitarianism approach because in order to get a good grasp of this topic we need to look at how the decision will impact us in the future. The utilitarianism approach will help us to examine this issue and see what some of the consequences are with this topic of capital punishment. For years, capital punishment has been used against criminals and continues to be used today, but lately this type of punishment has come into question because of the ethical question.

The legitimacy of the use of capital punishment has been tarnished by its widespread misuse , which has clouded our judgment regarding the justifiability of the death penalty as a punitive measure. However, the problems with capital punishment, such as the “potential error, irreversibility, arbitrariness and racial skew" , are not a basis for its abolition, as the world of homicide suffer from these problems more acutely. To tackle this question, one must disregard the currently blemished universal status quo and purely assess the advantages and disadvantages of the death penalty as a punitive measure. Through unprejudiced examination of the death penalty and its consequential impacts, it is evident that it is a punishment that effectively serves its retributive, denunciatory, deterrent, and incapacitative goals.

Capital punishment, otherwise known as the death penalty, is a controversial subject which has been argued for decades due to the ethical decisions involved. People believe the death penalty is the right thing to do and that it is the perfect example of ‘justice’ while others believe that it is immoral and overly expensive. The death penalty is not a logical sentence for criminals, it doesn’t give them the right type of justice and it is immoral.

Capital Punishment is a moral controversy in today’s society. It is the judicial execution of criminals judged guilty of capital offenses by the state, or in other words, the death penalty. The first established death penalty laws can date back to the Eighteenth Century B.C. and the ethical debates towards this issue have existed just as long. There is a constant pro-con debate about this issue, and philosophers like Aristotle and Mill have their own take on this controversy as well. Aristotle is against capital punishment, while Mill believes it is morally permissible.

In the United States, the use of the death penalty continues to be a controversial issue. Every election year, politicians, wishing to appeal to the moral sentiments of voters, routinely compete with each other as to who will be toughest in extending the death penalty to those persons who have been convicted of first-degree murder. Both proponents and opponents of capital punishment present compelling arguments to support their claims. Often their arguments are made on different interpretations of what is moral in a just society. In this essay, I intend to present major arguments of those who support the death penalty and those who are opposed to state sanctioned executions application . However, I do intend to fairly and accurately

If we examine some arguments presented from both sides, opponents of the capital punishment claim that executing someone is nothing more than an immoral, state-authorized killing which undervalues the human life and destroys our respect for our government which itself says that killing is wrong. But the supporters of the death penalty think that certain murderers

The main summary of Cesare Beccaria’s ‘of crimes and punishment’ was best said in a statement by Beccaria himself which was ‘In order that any punishment should not be an act of violence committed by one person or many against a private citizen, it is essential that it should be public, prompt, necessary, the minimum possible under the given circumstances, proportionate to the crimes, and established by law. ' (Beccaria, C. 2003 pg. 24) Beccaria’s theory was that punishment should only be used to prevent an offender from reoffending and non-offenders from ever offending. This was done by looking at the severity of the punishment, that the punishment should match the crime and should not exceed severity than what is needed to achieve the deterrence of crime. Beccaria is extremely against the idea of torture being used and debates that it should never be used against someone who is still in the stage of being innocent until proven guilty; he is also opposed to the use of capital punishment unless used in extreme restricted situations.

Death penalty or capital punishment is a legal procedure carried out by the government of a state which sentences a convicted person to death. Capital punishment has been a matter of controversy for various decades now. According to some people, such as the Swiss President Burkhalter (2014) death penalty is a valid act of justice whereas, Coretta Scott King opposes such practices. The main purpose of this argumentative synthesis essay is to point out the differences and similarities between the two articles, namely “The Death Penalty is a step back” by Coretta Scott King (1969) and “The Penalty of Death” by H.L.Mencken (1926), and to also the validity of the arguments provided. Both Mencken and King provide their own opinions on the issue of death penalty; whether it is an ethical practice or not.

Fights, killings, riots and having threats being caused to not only you but family members as well is not even the half of the things that seem to be going on inside a prison that a correction officer has to deal with on a daily. Inmates were being charged daily and taken into custody for actions that they have or have not decided to make which have already been called out by early theorist. These theories were created by man in which they believe that a person acts the way that they do based off of their perspective.

Capital punishment dates back to 18th century B.C. in the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon. Under this code twenty five crimes, excluding murder, were punishable by death. In historical data, the first death penalty was imposed to offender who was blamed for magic in 16th century BC Egypt (Regio, 1997). Unfortunately, death penalty is still practiced in some countries. For example, in Egypt recently on 24 March 2014, Minya Criminal Court imposed death penalty to 529 followers of Egyptian ex-president Mohamed Morsi for their participation in violence (Amnesty International, 2014). Nowadays, United States also practices capital punishment. According to the fact sheet of DPIC (2014) 20 criminals from different states were executed this year

Roger Hood (2008) cites the opinion of Cesare Beccaria in the book On Crime and Punishment published in 1764 that says: “Capital punishment was both inhumane and ineffective: an unacceptable weapon for a modern enlightened state to employ, and less effective than the cer­tainty of imprisonment. Capital punishment was counterproductive if the purpose of law was to impart a moral conception of the duties of citizens to each other”. Beccaria's critics towards the capital punishment concept is a convincing data for the researcher, because as the critics he stated as above, it may influence the researcher conclusion of determining whether the death penalty should be abolished or still be carried out.

It is better to try and prevent crimes than it is to punish them, this is achieved by good legislation which guides men to their greatest, or least unhappiness possible (Beccaria, 1767). As mentioned previously, Beccaria’s utilitarian ideology has shaped the justice system in western societies for many decades. Therefore, Beccaria can be described as a very influential thinker. Without his contribution we could still have a system of capital punishment, and that is a worrying thought. However, we now seem fixed with utilitarian justice. It may be argued that it is now time to move towards restorative justice. There are also those such as Tullock (1974), who argue for a return to harsher sentencing. Some states in the US still consider the death penalty to be a legitimate punishment. So it can be said that Beccaria is undoubtedly a key thinker in criminology, but as with all key thinkers he is not without his critics.

From an early age, children are taught that murder is morally wrong. In today’s complex society that is impeded by unsettling periods of civil unrest, it is an expectation for everyone to acknowledge and accept that murder is one of the worst crimes individuals can commit. Perhaps it can be said that the death penalty is one of our legal system’s biggest contradictions of itself, as, if someone commits murder (or another heinous crime of that caliber), such ‘murderers’ will, in states that have capital punishment laws, be sent to Death Row and ultimately murdered in order to prevent potential future crimes by such perpetrators. I believe that the death penalty is wrong not only as it is immoral to take a life, but also, such ineffective laws waste money and do not deter crime.

In this paper I’m going to talk about Capital Punishment and the numerous ideas, thoughts, views and opinions people have about it and how they feel about this type of punishment. There are people who see capital punishment as morally wrong and committing a murder or on the side of the spectrum people see it as the right thing to do and believe that the individual receiving the punishment deserves it. I will also talk about how capital punishment can be used as a deterrent and make individuals second guess the decision they want to make and this may very well be a consequence of their actions. Another thing I will look at and talk about is how people have been falsely accused and sentenced to death or are currently sitting on death row. Also the technology and resources that are available today are so precise and extremely effective that to falsely convict someone is extremely slim and not common at all. There are numerous types of methods used to commit capital punishment and I will take a look at them and discuss them and look at some of them are inhumane and cruel. The process of getting on death row and eventually getting put to death is a very long and tedious one and it takes years to happen. I will discuss how people can make appeals, try and have their case heard again and to try and get off death row even though at times it isn’t successful at all. I will also discuss the states that still practice capital punishment and what states have outlawed

Capital punishment is beneficial to the community. It provides the society with a sense of security. The death penalty contains a positive influence on the future. A heavily debated topic is, “Does capital punishment deter people more than a life sentence to prison?” An explanation on why will be covered later. An issues many people have with capital punishment, is when it is just or not just. This is a topic many stray away from, because it is difficult to decide. Finding the right consequence for an action is difficult. While this paper is for the use of capital punishment, it is clearly not needed for every crime, or even every murder. Overusing capital punishment, such as using it for every murder, will negatively impact the country, and not using it has the same effect.