Is it morally permissible to execute an individual with little evidence?
Many people believe that capital punishment is morally impermissible. They believe that several forms of punishment other than the capital punishments are available for serious offenders. Debate on the application or award of execution as capital punishment is rooted from the argument by Kant that; capital is sometimes morally permissible and required. Although it is mostly the most effective deterrent method. It suffers some setbacks, especially when the evidence presented is less. Little evidence leads to the execution of innocent people. It is therefore immoral to execute offenders with little and rough evidence (Sheldon, 1936).
The literature reveals that if the current body of rough and shallow evidence is not
…show more content…
I also believe that, the eventual elimination of errors that characterize many capital punishments in the United States would also lead to decline such punishment for severe punishment.
Do you think it was morally right to execute Todd Willingham? Why or why not? Is this good from a utilitarian point of view?
Cameron Todd Willingham was executed in Texas in 2004 for allegedly setting a fire that killed his three young daughters 13 years earlier. He continuously claimed his innocence until his conviction and thereafter execution. Many legal experts questioned the arson investigation before his execution. I believe that it was morally wrong to execute Todd Willingham
According to Texas Forensic commission, after conviction of Todd Willingham it clearer that training and education of fire investigators is necessary (Caille, 1992).
Utilitarianism demands that the good for the majority be the ruling. In my view, the execution of Todd was not good in the utilitarianism sense (Giannelli,
According to a recent poll made by Pew Research Center and CBS News, approximately 56% of Americans support the death penalty. Bruce Fein, an author and constitutional law expert, is one of the many constitutional law experts in favor of capital punishment. In his article “The Death Penalty Should Not Be Abolished,” Fein states: “The death penalty is an awesome punishment. It should be applied sparingly to the most egregious and shocking crimes committed by the most unrepentant and callous offenders." The main essence of Fein’s argument embodies ideals that strongly advocate the death penalty. He blatantly suggests that the death penalty should only be used towards offenders who have committed the most inhumane crimes, however, regardless of what the crime is, I believe capital punishment is just as morally heinous as the crime committed itself.
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.
Many contend that the death penalty is morally impermissible due to some irreversible miscarriages of justices . However, capital punishment can be defended in both consequentialist and deontological terms. Kantian ethics claims that, for exceptionally heinous crimes committed with malice aforethought, the penalty of death is not only morally justifiable but is morally obligatory. Consequentialists can substantiate the use of capital punishment through the claim that the death penalty is more effective than other more moderate punishments in averting the murder of innocents through inducing the fear of consequences in
This trial was ethical by legal terms; however, I find it hard to say that morally this was the ethical case to take to trail. I understand taking hostages in a college campus is very wrong and it appears that he had some clear thought of binding the doors and
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.
The state of Oklahoma alone has executed 195 people for crimes such as rape, murder and kidnapping. (“Crimes Punishable”) In the Constitution of the United States the eight amendment prohibits “cruel; and unusual punishment” inflicted on those who have been convicted of a crime. A total of 34 states have performed executions on people for various crimes. How do we know what is or isn’t “cruel; and unusual punishment”? Some would say the death penalty is stretching the ways of the law and others would say it is a complete violation of the constitution. The views of people are split evenly. People want others to pay for what they’ve done but may think that the death penalty is a little too extreme. Oklahoma is a very conservative state, and we like to do things the “old way”. With society changing so frequently we rarely match what the others states are doing and we could potentially be seen as a “bad” state. So the decisions such as whether or not to have the death penalty affects all Oklahomans and some aren’t okay with that. In the paragraphs below we will explore all aspects of the death penalty, and by the end we will find out what made the people decide the death penalty was constitutional and what exactly the people’s opinions on this subject are.
Kirk Bloodsworth was 22 when he spent eight years in prison, two of those on death row. He was wrongfully convicted. A 9-year old girl was raped and killed on July 25, 1984. Two boys had seen her walking with a man before she suddenly disappeared. The boys described the man to the police and the police came to the conclusion that the murderer was Bloodsworth. He repeatedly claimed he was innocent but he was found guilty and sentenced to death on March, 1985. After 8 years he finally proved he was innocent through DNA testing. He was released from prison on June 1993. He was paid 300,000 dollars (“Correcting”). The US should not institute the death penalty everywhere in the country because it would put us at risk of executing innocent people, costs us millions of dollars in administering the penalty and there is a better way to help the families of murder victims.
Anthony Graves was living on death row for almost two decades while being in solitary confinement. While he was proven un-guilty of murder he still has the punishment of eighteen years of living while being mentally and physically dead. After Mr. Graves was let out of prison, he still has to rethink about almost being killed because of a prosecutor that didn’t want to lose her case. How unprofessional could that be, letting someone rot in jail for a crime he didn’t commit, while the prosecutor knew of doubts, but went along like he didn’t hear it. The cost of one’s life is more than all of the money in the world, because once someone is lethally injected, no one can bring them back. Now I am starting to wonder about the death penalty and questioning myself is it fit for the worst of crimes for is it not fit at all. Kerry Max Cook was a former death row inmate that had conversations with Robert Earl Carter, "Anthony, I really believe, is innocent. I'm stunned that an innocent person is this close to execution (Rice,2005), was stated by former death row inmate Cook, that was let off for being proven
The first execution was in 1982 with Charles Brooks, Jr. Death Penalty has become a very important issue in Texas. Many disagree on the harsh punishments others are given, especially those who are executed without any evidence and whom are not guilty. Cameron Todd Willingham was one of the innocent ones. He was wrongfully charged with arson and the murder of his three children.
Administering the death penalty to the South Carolina killer Dylan Roof is a mistake for several reasons. First, Dylan Roof should suffer in jail for everything that he did to those nine people. They were excited, charming to welcome a man that never been to church and to let him stayed with them to the Bible study class. They were not meticulous because at the end of the Bible study he decided to kill nine innocent people, but hopefully he gets what he deserves in jail.
After, reviewing documents my position on the case would be very similar to those that feel he should still be executed even after learning about his life problems. If he entered into prison as a normal human being, but than his mental health begin to deteriorate; I only feel that occurred because he noticed that being in prison was not very
Capital punishment is most commonly known as the death penalty or punishment by death for a crime. It is a highly controversial topic and many people and great thinkers alike have debated about it. Two well-known figures are Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. Although both stand in favor of capital punishment, their reasons for coming to this conclusion are completely different. I personally stand against capital punishment, but my own personal view on it incorporates a few mixed elements from both individuals as well as my own personal insight. Firstly, in order to understand why Kant and Mill support capital punishment, we must first understand their views on punishment in general.
Death penalty is given to those people whose punishment is execution carried out by the government. Capital punishment has been a controversial issue in American history. There are many conflicting issues as to when to say capital punishment is right or wrong. The execution of Charles Singleton, places a different aspect whether capital punishment was ethical or unethical in Singleton’s case. Serving his time in prison, Charles Singleton was diagnosed with schizophrenia and became a victim of insanity. The state of Arkansans was granted permission to execute Singleton by administering antipsychotic drugs to make him mentally stable enough to where he is no longer insane. By giving those medications, he was considered sane and the execution
In society there many things that are debated among the people based on their beliefs, morals, and values. For this paper chose the death penalty because it is one of the highly debated topics in not only today’s society but also in the past. The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, it used as a procedure of retaliation against those who commit violent crimes such as murder and other capital crimes. There are many forms of this punishment, for instance, the electric chair, lethal injections, and the firing squad. There are many feelings and arguments in relation to capital punishment. Some people believe that the death penalty is moral because they deserve it and it provides protection to the society. However, in this paper I will argue that capital punishment is totally immoral because it is not fair, is it unnecessary, and unethical.
In 1879, the United States Supreme Court ruled, by a vote of 9-0, that execution by firing squad was not cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution. This began a long debate on whether or not a government reserves the right to punish those who have taken a life by taking their lives. There are many reasons as to why someone would be against capital punishment: it is not our right as humans to play God, it is against the constitution, the threat of capital punishment is not a valid deterrent, it is morally corrupt to take a life. All of these points are valid, and they represent the mindset of millions of Americans; however, capital punishment is a valuable asset to be reserved for only “the most heinous murders and the most brutal and conscienceless murderers” (Alice).