The Death Penalty Is Not A Step Toward The Resolution Of The Criminal Problem

Good Essays
Student #110’s Paper #5: Response to In favor of Capital Punishment
Our Judicial System is messed up in many ways. From the way people get arrested to the sentencing process, everything is messed up. Our justice system obviously does not support crime which is why people get arrested when they commit crimes but something that has always troubled me is: how come, it is not okay for a regular civilian to kill someone but it is okay for a judge to decide to put someone under the death penalty, which is basically killing them. As the author of the article: In Favor of Capital Punishment calls it, why is it okay for the judicial system to commit “judicial homicide” (Barzun, 354). In this paper, I will discuss the reasons why I think the death penalty is not a step toward the resolution of the criminal problems that our cities are facing. I will use the four arguments presented by Barzun to support my thoughts.
From a philosophical point of view, it is not moral to kill. No matter how one may put it; it is not okay to kill another person whether or not it is for revenge. How are government officials going to tell people not to kill other people- because not only because it is wrong but also because they will face the consequences- and kill criminals because they think that it is appropriate in certain situations. As Barzun said:” punishment for crime is a primitive idea rooted in revenge” (Barzun, 354). When a judge decides to give someone the death penalty, their decision is
Get Access