The 8th amendment of the United States Constitution states that “excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Specifically, the idea of cruel and unusual punishment has been a topic of dispute since its inception. Although the United States practiced execution as a punishment beforehand, “the Supreme Court did not address the death penalty issue until 1972.” It is often debated how we are to define cruel and unusual because of the vague nature of the terms. Because it is thought that the terms were kept vague in order to keep up with new forms of cruel and unusual punishment that would come into being after the constitution was written, the standards for determining what is cruel and unusual has been set by “evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society” meaning that it changes depending on what our society deems decent or indecent at the time. The problem is that our society has always been split on this issue. Whether it involves the death penalty or the quality of prisoner confinement, some hold the opinion that these people deserve to be treated as less than human because of the crimes they have committed. Others vehemently disagree saying that everyone, no matter what they’ve done, deserves to be treated as humanely as possible. Those of this opinion are generally opposed to the death penalty. For future interpretation of this facet of our constitution, the cruel and
In 1987 Edward Dewey Smith, a man previously convicted for several drug related offences, was caught crossing the Canadian border in return from Bolivia with several ounces of cocaine. He was sentenced to eight years of imprisonment under the Narcotics Control Act which has a minimum requirement of 7 years if drugs are caught being imported into Canada. It was brought into question whether or not this minimum sentence under section 5(2) of the Narcotics Control Act conflicted with section 7,9 and 12 of the Charter. In conclusion, the court decided that the minimal seven year sentence was in fact not cruel and unusual punishment. The definition for cruel and unusual punishment in the charter is punishment that causes outrage by the public and
The 8th amendment states, “ Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Which brings me to the case of Thompson vs. Oklahoma. The debate is on whether or not capital punishment should be given to minors. On one hand, some may argue that Thompson should have been charged with capital punishment because “his acts were heinous and cruel” (Pearson Prentice Hall: n.d.). On the other hand, others such as Oklahoma argue that it is a violation of the 8th amendment under “cruel and unusual punishment.” This creates the argument of Thompson vs. Oklahoma.
The death penalty also known as capital punishment is an execution in which the person who committed the offence is put to death by the state. It was first practiced in Jamestown colony, 1608. The person was hanged for spying for the Spanish government and was the 1st person sentenced to death in America. Since then, it has been a form to punish the criminals for committing such heinous crimes and putting end to violence and crime rates. Despite how people agree that the death penalty is justifiable, however; it still violates the international human rights laws. These laws were created to protect the lives of all human beings including the criminals, who some might agree they do not deserve to live. Even though some might say that the
The Eighth Amendment states “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted” (The Eighth Amendment 231).When the Eighth amendment was written, there was an obvious concern for the mistreatment of criminals by the judicial system. The problem that arose was not the inability of the Supreme Court to understand the meaning between the words, but the inability to agree with what constitutes “Cruel and Unusual”. What one Justice considered not enough, another might feel that the punishment was too severe. McWilliams writes, “Even Justice Black, advocate for the proposition “that there are ‘absolutes’ in our Bill of Rights, and that they were put there on purpose by men who knew what
In discussion of the 8th amendment the topic that will be covered is the history before the amendment has been attached to the Bill of Rights, the interpretations of the amendment, and the amendment in affecting this generation today. This amendment officially states in the Constitution, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted” (CRS/LII Annotated Constitution Eighth Amendment). This emendation is about the government mandating that punishments are not allowed when they are cruel or unusual. “…; but it is safe to affirm that punishments of torture [such as drawing and quartering, emboweling alive, beheading, public dissecting, and burning alive], and all the others in the
The most valued documents in modern American society tend also to be the most heavily debated. For instance, interpretations of the United States Constitution tend to be rooted in one of two firmly entrenched beliefs;while the first camp believes it to be set in stone, the second his convinced that the United States Constitution is by nature a perpetually evolving document, meant to reflect the desires and needs of the people. Even amongst those in the same camp, disagreements abound; those believing that the Constitution is set in stone are divided on issues such as the eighth amendment’s prohibition of ‘cruel and unusual punishment’. It is difficult to reach a consensus on what, constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. For example, the concept of waterboarding is championed by many as a ‘humane’ form of torture which causes no physical harm. However, it was deemed a cruel and unusual punishment due to the sensations of drowning and symptoms of mental illness which it produced in its victims. It can therefore be inferred that physical injury is not the only factor to be considered in whether or not a practice is to be deemed inhumane; factors such as mental wellbeing and fitness of punishment must also be considered. This leads one to ponder how the concept of solitary confinement could possibly even be considered when it so clearly violates the protections which the eighth amendment provides.
The prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment largely concerns itself with disproportionate and arbitrary punishments imposed by the government. “The Court has repeatedly emphasized the Eighth Amendment’s expansive and vital character and its capacity for evolutionary growth.” (Kanovitz, 2010) Cruelty is interpreted as actions that oppose current standards of decency. As public opinion grows and changes these standards are apt to change. The vague wording of the Eighth Amendment allows room for the opinion of what punishments are acceptable to adapt to modern times.
The supreme court made a ruling that determined that one’s punishment must be equal to the crime committed due to the eighth amendment that prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. “The Court has attempted to simultaneously satisfy its moral inclinations and the text of the Constitution, but these efforts have resulted in an inconsistent and confusing Eighth Amendment Punishments Clause jurisprudence” (Ryan, 2010, p. 569).
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.
Capital Punishment is Not Only Unusual, But Cruel The most widely known aspect of the eighth amendment is the fact that it prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Cruel and unusual punishment is perceived as punishment that causes “an unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain” (Bailey). Is capital punishment cruel and unusual? It is one of the most controversial topics in America today. In effect since the 1600s, the US Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was “cruel and unusual” in 1972 but reversed this decision when a "cleaner" way to bring about death was found in 1976 (Encarta).
The moral and ethical debate on the sentencing and enforcement of capital punishment has long baffled the citizens and governing powers of the United States. Throughout time, the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, and the vast majority beliefs of Americans, have been in a constant state of perplexity. Before the 1960s, the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution were interpreted as permitting the death penalty. However, in the early 1960s, it was suggested that the death penalty was a "cruel and unusual" punishment and therefore unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment. Many argue that capital punishment is an absolute necessity, in order to deter crime, and to ‘make things right’ following a heinous crime of murder. Despite the belief that capital punishment may seem to be the only tangible, permanent solution to ending future capital offenses, the United States should remove this cruel and unnecessary form of punishment from our current judicial systems.
David Figueroa Eng. 101A Professor Stern 4/20/15 Final draft In conclusion, in discussions of torture, one controversial issue has been on the use of it. On one hand, the people against torture argue that it is cruel and unusual punishment. On the other hand, those for torture argue that it should be used for the greater good. Others even maintain that under extreme circumstances, it may be admissible if it can save American lives. My own view is that no one should be subjected to cruel punishment because it is not only illegal, unreliable, ineffective, time consuming, it also has too many flaws that could potentially ruin innocent lives. The definition of torture is any act, whether physical or emotional, or maybe both, is intentionally subjected to a specific individual or a group for many reasons. Most of these reasons that torture is administered is for extracting information from an individual or just for punishing him/her for a crime that he/she has committed or is suspected of committing. The use of torture can be used to intimidate a person to give information that may be beneficial for a nation. The use of torture has been used for many centuries. The purposes of using torture have changed over the years as well as the methods in which a person is tortured. One crucial piece that has been established that separates us human beings from barbarians is the prohibition of using torture. There are many reasons why torture has been deemed a crime now in society. There are
An Impassioned Debate: An overview of the death penalty in America depicts the facts about the eighth amendment. The eighth amendment is the prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments (Masci 1). There are two significant cases that have inflamed the debate over the capital punishment, The Baze v. Reese case, and the Kennedy v. Louisiana case. The first case reveals the strong debate that the execution by lethal injection is inhuman and in violation of the eight amendment. The second case inflamed the
In the United States Constitution, the 8th Amendment prohibits the use and practices of cruel and unusual punishment. What exactly is considered to be cruel and unusual punishment? This question is a hot topic among America's many different current controversies. Many people are saying that the use of capital punishment (to be sentenced to death as a penalty in the eyes of the law [a capital crime]. An execution [capital punishment]) is a direct violation of the 8th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (Capital Punishment). They say there should be another way to deal with these criminals other than having them executed. The purpose of this paper is to give a brief history of the death penalty
"On April 29, 2014, Oklahoma prison officials administered an untested mixture of 3 drugs to Clayton Lockett, a convicted murderer and rapist” (Greenberg 1). “The execution went immediately and terrifyingly wrong. Following administration of the first drug, Lockett, obviously conscious, started to writhe and groan, and then went into convulsions” (1). This is one example of the many botched executions that have occurred in recent history. With the possibility of an execution going as badly as Lockett’s, we must ask if we are violating the US constitution. The 8th amendment states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted” (amend. XIII). considering the possibility of an execution going as badly as Lockett’s, we must ask if we are violating this amendment. The execution of an inmate is also likely to bring up issues of faith, Romans 12:18 states “leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the lord” (Rom. 12.18). Morality should determine where we go as a country, including the punishments we invoke.