The Ethics of Capital Punishment Essay

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.

Since the earliest times, man has struggled with the concept of justice. The controversy of capital punishment has weighed on the minds of humans since the beginning. When we are wronged it is our natural instinct to demand compensation. This thirst for revenge can be seen in the earliest civilizations and societies. Ancient Hammurabi code states “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” (History of the World). For many people this little axiom seems fair. Others however, think otherwise and warn of a blind and toothless community. What is it about capital punishment that divides so many Americans? Is it the possibility of an innocent man being executed too much of a risk? Should our current

Hands stained with blood, our justice system still remains battered and broken. States disintegrating the laws that once stood, the laws stealing the lives of innocent, further perpetrating injustice. No matter the decline, abhorrent and controversial execution methods still remain commonplace. Challenge must be made against such methods as lethal injection. Capital punishment, with declining support must be eliminated from our country’s justice system, for the inability to hinder crime, slaying the innocent and underprivileged, while the realization that death is not the perfect punishment sets in.

     Many positions can be defended when debating the issue of capital punishment. In Jonathan Glover's essay "Executions," he maintains that there are three views that a person may have in regard to capital punishment: the retributivist, the absolutist, and the utilitarian. Although Glover recognizes that both statistical and intuitive evidence cannot validate the benefits of capital punishment, he can be considered a utilitarian because he believes that social usefulness is the only way to justify it. Martin Perlmutter on the other hand, maintains the retributivist view of capital punishment, which states that a murderer deserves to be punished because of a conscious decision to

If there is a desire by the American people to maintain the death penalty, let us at least be spared the hypocrisy of a justification by example.  The death penalty is a penalty, to be sure, a frightful torture, both physical and moral, but it provides no sure example except a demoralizing one. It punishes, but it forestalls nothing; indeed, it may even arouse the impulse to murder. It hardly seems to exist, except for the man who suffers it-- in his soul for months and years, in his body during the desperate and violent hour when he is cut in two without suppressing his life. Let us call it by the name which, for lack of any other nobility, will at least give the nobility of truth, and let us

The number of individuals executed via the Death Penalty peaked in 1999 and has been receding at a dramatic rate. As it is becoming less frequently used, its necessity and morality has been called into question. Both sides of the argument offer convincing arguments; however, mounting evidence shows it is cost-prohibitive, it fails to act as a deterrent, it is racially biased, and that the justice system is fallible. I will analyze both sides critically to try and gain insight into why we are part of the 29% of countries who choose to retain it as a form of punishment. Moreover, the two ethical theories I will use to carry out this analysis involve the Harm Principle and Moral Relativism. Both ethical theories can support the pro and con side, so I will be using both as I look at each side of the debate. Using the principles outlined in the Harm Principle and Moral Relativism, I will analyze the morality of capital punishment and access which side the theories gravitate towards.

Many people argue whether or not the death penalty should still be a form of punishment in the legal systems of the fifty states of the United States of America. People who are against the death penalty say that this form of punishment should not exist, because it is inhumane. Alongside that argument, people also say that it is in direct violation of the basic human rights. Not to mention, they also see it as an outdated punishment that existed in less civilized times. They say that this kind of punishment should not exist in modern times. Supporters of the death penalty beg to differ. They see it as a justified form of punishment. People who are given the death penalty have committed murder, so supporters don’t see it as a problem when a convicted murderer is killed. This is the source of justification for many supporters of the death penalty. Supporters also say that capital punishment provides closure to the victims family. It is also said that it is a way to deter possible copycats which would save more lives, by sacrificing the perpetrators. I am a supporter of the death penalty, it should remain.

South Carolina, January 15, 1993. After wounding an Orangeburg, S.C. police officer with a misfired bullet, Thomas Treshawn Ivey, an Alabama prison escapee, proceeded to fired five more shots into the police officer from a handgun at close range after the wounded police office had reached for his gun. Ivey fled the scene but was quickly apprehended. This scenario is not to different from the horrible acts of violence that lead an offender to death row where today some 3,500 people are awaiting the ultimate punishment.

     “This is not a nice man … innocent is not a word that suits him in any way,” says Brian Webster when speaking of Matthew Poncelet, the man on death row in the movie Dead Man Walking. Many people feel that the death penalty is immoral and it should not be used; however I feel completely opposite. I believe that capital punishment is a fair sentence for a murderer to receive.

When the term capital punishment comes up, consideration must be given to the history of mankind in relation to such form of retribution. From the beginning of recorded history, the death penalty has existed and for many crimes other then first degree murder. Before anyone takes a FOR or AGAINST position on capital punishment, perhaps we should take a look at the actual facts and statistics on this controversial topic. Then, with all this in mind, take a dialectical approach, with the idea of death itself and see if we can come up with a clearer understanding of the reason for such actions to be accepted in our society. However, if a stand needed to be taken to keep the death penalty or abolish it, one must

Capital punishment has been in effect for centuries, and the topic of the death penalty invokes massive controversy still to this day. According to the Death Penalty Information Center (2015), Lake Research Partners took a poll in 2010, based on “support for alternatives to the death penalty.” The outcome of the survey resulted with a mere 33% of Americans in favor of capital punishment, in contrast to the 61% that were in support of an alternative to the death penalty. The remaining 6% voted they had no opinion either way. Is capital punishment the reasonable means of reprimand for the murder of another human being?

Hundreds of murderers are put into jail and then let out several years later. They say they have learned their lesson, but yet when they do get out they commit more crimes. Thus, sending them back into jail. The only way to make sure these ruthless murderers don’t commit these crimes again is by capital punishment. As the Bible says, "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. " If someone commits a capital offense, they should receive a capital punishment, because the state won’t have to pay for the criminal’s lifetime in jail, it provides the most complete retribution and condemnation, and crime rates will begin to drop.

     For many years, capital punishment has been in use, but it is not been effective. Theodore Robert Bundy in 1978, slipped into a Tallahassee sorority house and bludgeoned two sleeping women to death, then killed a 12-year-old girl in Lake City. He was sentenced to three concurrent death sentences in 1979. Nine years later, Bundy is alive and well on the Death Row (Von Drehle 1A). A prisoner sentenced to death spends an average of 10 years, nationally, on death row waiting for their execution. More than 2,100 people live on America's death Rows. At the current execution rate, it would take eighty-two years to kill them all. Death Row is going to get bigger, the wait

Capital Punishment? The question as to whether the state has the right to execute a person found guilty of murder has been debated at length for decades. As with the subject of abortion, it is one of the most controversial topics of discussion in our country today. According to the website religious www.tolerance.org, about 60 to 80% of American adults say they want to retain capital punishment (2). In fact, there are only 12 states that have chosen not to enact the death penalty since the ruling of the Supreme Court in 1976 that said it was constitutionally permissible to have capital punishment (Bonner 1). This strikes me as being rather odd since a large number of those same people claim to

In the horizon, there are always heightened debates over issues with capital punishment in today judicial system. Today thirty-three states, along with the United Stated Government and U.S. military, have the power to legally take away someone’s life. Though it is very much illegal to take someone life within society, our state and federal government’s do the very same thing we are prohibited from doing. The first section in this paper, will be discussing the reason on why our governments allow capital punishment, relating to the deterrence of crimes such as murder. The deterrence of murder and capital punishment seem to only work if you over exercise capital punishment. Such evidence provided will show the difference in states that utilize capital punishment more than other states that have not abolished the deterrence method. The second section will be discussing the retribution relating to capital punishment. It also covers unanswered questions that relate to utilizing methods of execution on innocent people. The last section covers the Eighth Amendment violation relating to cruel and unusual punishment. It also discusses some of the botched executions that have been conducted over the years.