Ernest Van Den Haag's In Defense Of Capital Punishment

Decent Essays
Capital punishment has been a hot topic for quite some time now. In earlier times it was merely a way to punish as well as an attempt to deter members of society from committing heinous crimes. In the last century we have actively monitored the effects of capital punishment, and this has revealed the truth. It is for these reasons capital punishment is not morally acceptable. In this paper I shall argue that capital punishment is immoral. In Furman v. Georgia we find a landmark case in which the legality of capital punishment is exposed. Judges Stewart, White, and Douglas found the death penalty to be immoral given the arbitrary forces involved. ("Furman v. Georgia") They believed this was causing a higher number of minorities specifically blacks to be subjected to…show more content…
One such person is Ernest Van Den Haag the author of “In Defense of Capital Punishment.” He argues there is no expressed or valid reasons for removing capital punishment in murder cases, and even expresses his support for the arbitration used in capital punishment. (Van Den Haag) He also argues on the basis of the 5th amendment which states nobody shall be “Deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” This implying the judicial system is in no way breaching the 14th because it to reiterates the importance of the 5th, and as long as the defendant is provided due process capital punishment is in fact fair. (Van Den Haag) He then backs the morality factor by stating if it were immoral the general public would be against it and we would see less and less people receiving the death penalty yet we do not. On top of this the morality of capital punishment can be backed up by the Utilitarian moral theory given the fact removing murderers benefits the larger group or the non-criminals and also backs up Van Den Haag’s claims about the general public. Though these are solid reasons they lack the depth of a solid
Get Access