05 Dec Middleton Capital Punishment Kameron Middleton University of Memphis Capital Punishment Introduction The topic that I am interested in is Capital Punishment.

Capital Punishment

Kameron Middleton

University of Memphis

Capital Punishment

Introduction

The topic that I am interested in is Capital Punishment. Capital punishment is the act of executing criminals for specific crimes after proper legal trials have been concluded. Only the state has the power to execute a person. Non-state organizations cannot execute a person. When they do so, it is considered murder. The crimes that warrant capital punishment is very serious, such as certain types of murder, treason, adultery, rape, and certain types of fraud. These are known as capital crimes.

Many countries around the world use capital punishment. The death penalty has been abolished in some countries; that is why they cannot use execution. China leads when it comes to executing people. China is closely followed by Iran, the USA, and Saudi Arabia. The United States has a constitutional ban against any punishments that are cruel or unusual. Execution is considered an unusual punishment that is also cruel. The state does not have the right to kill human beings. If anything, the state has to protect its citizens. Execution is a capital punishment that comes with premeditation and ceremony. That is why most people consider it inhuman. There has been a lot of dilemma surrounding the topic of capital punishment. The question of whether the death penalty should be legal, or illegal remains unsolved. It is a contemporary social issue. This paper aims to examine capital punishment carefully, determine the pros and cons of capital punishment, and what can be done to protect human rights and ensure criminals are held accountable and deterred from committing further crimes.

Literature review

Capital punishment was once used in many parts of the world, but the practice is now being discouraged in many countries. Some countries have abolished it while others are still in the process of doing so. When it comes to countries that still execute people, China takes the lead. It is closely followed by other countries such as Iran, the USA, and Saudi Arabia. In the United States, there is a constitutional ban against punishments that are cruel or unusual (McRae, 2017). Execution is considered an unusual punishment, which is also very cruel. Nobody has the right to kill another human being regardless of the crime they have committed. The State must protect its citizens and ensure they are not exposed to any danger. The reason why most people are against Execution is that it comes with premeditation and celebrations. Some reasons why capital punishment is inhuman is that it violates the value of human rights. The wrong person may be executed; there have been many cases where innocent people have been killed for something they did not do. For too many people, capital punishment is not necessary. There are plenty of other forms of punishment than death. Every person has the right to live; if a person commits a crime, I feel that death would be an easy way out. That person should pay for what they did by sitting for the rest of their life. Lastly, it is cruel and inhumane, and that goes against the constitution.

Statement of the problem

This is a problem because many innocent people lose their lives every year on death row. Many innocent people are sentenced to death that did not commit the crime. People receive the death penalty for crimes that do not deserve it.

Discussion

Capital punishment relates to the death penalty sanctioned by the government for certain punishments. It is a common narrative globally since it has attracted a lot of interest in juridical discussion and policy. This is because the necessity of the concept raises the issue of legal and moral dimensions of society. Most importantly, capital punishment violates fundamental human rights, hence unacceptable.

The proponents of capital punishment contend that modern societies are driven by individualism and freedom of choice. Therefore, one should be responsible for his actions. In this regard, capital punishment should be applied to maintain the peace of the whole society at the expense of a few reckless and violent individuals. On the other hand, critics of capital punishment based their arguments on moral principles, ethical norms, and religious teachings.

Capital punishment is better explained by various historical phenomena, such as survival, adaptation, and dominance. During the early days of human development, preference towards murder was purely a solution to the adaptive problem. This has penetrated the modern society attributed mainly to the psychological homicide approach. On this notion, humanity has legalized the death penalty terming the affected people not worthy of human love. As a result, the prevalence of capital punishment has persisted throughout the world. Estimates show that the United States and Japan are the only developed and democratic countries to retain the death penalty (McRae, 2017). Other countries observing the same trend involve countries from Asia, the Middle East, and the Caribbean (McRae, 2017). With increased international movements and right-wing governments, several countries have abolished capital punishment. This was an effort to promote democracy and protect human rights (Moreland & Watson, 2016).

The country must protect its citizens; however, the state eliminates its citizen through capital punishment. That represents an inhumane act and should be grounded within moral justification. The reasoning that the death penalty is a moral obligation as long as it prevents significant murders is inconclusive and lacks logical reasoning. Nobody has the right to kill another human being regardless of the crime they have committed. This is because it would have signified vengeance and not the required justice. Murdering a murder does not provide moral satisfaction for the lost lives, hence a mockery of the progressive society. To civilized people, capital punishment is not necessary since there are many alternative forms of punishments that follow fundamental human rights. Every person has the right to live, but in the case of a committed crime, non-cruel methods of execution can be used.

Based on the theoretical background presented in this study, there are several advantages to implementing capital punishment. It offers a deterrent against aggravated crimes resulting in declined crimes. This will also have a positive effect on sustaining peace in society. Additionally, the death penalty reduces government expenditure on the management of the prison. On the contrary, capital punishment can produce adverse effects, including violation of human rights and innocent people’s execution. More so, the approach can be manipulated and used for wrong reasons such as political dominance. The arguments concerning capital punishment are usually grouped into three involving substantive, comparative, and non-comparative. In terms of substantive supporters of the death penalty, it requires fitting punishment, but the argument is counteracted by respecting people’s rights. Equal justice does not apply to other cases, such as rape rapists. Hence, the death penalty for murder would be unfair. Moreover, the non-comparable aspect favors abolitionists since once an innocent person is executed, the life cannot be reversed (Stichter, 2014). In this regard, critics of punishment have strong arguments and have more strong disadvantages than advantages.

By considering the argument presented in this document, the death penalty should be abolished. This is because it is a dubious and controversial punishment that lacks moral value and violates fundamental human rights. Through efforts from international communities, religious leaders, and politicians, there is a need to develop a framework that will suppress the death penalty. Several factors have been linked to the successful removal of the death penalty. These include regional diffusion and multi-stakeholder partnerships (Moreland & Watson, 2016). Also, there is a need to identify the root cause of associated violent crimes. This is critical in hindering the re-occurrence of the crimes because numerous measures will be put in place. In this regard, socio-cultural issues need to be addressed, and effective psycho support provided.

Further, the law should be amended to individualize the punishment. In this sense, the sentencing procedure should follow a humanistic and individualized approach, the modern penology method. More specifically, crime is a real-life event influenced by several factors, such as personality and motive. Such factors should not be ignored during sentencing. Also, increased awareness of the death penalty is vital to reduce cases of capital punishment. Proto prions may as well be vital in providing a solution posed by capital punishment. They are an innovative approach used to describe the socio-political reality that abolishes capital punishment (Rubin, 2016).

Finally, life imprisonment is a solution to capital punishment. However, imprisonment without a likelihood of parole has been criticized by prison administrators, terming it as unmanageable. Management issues cannot be compared to the right to live; therefore, life imprisonment can be useful in this case. In this regard, various limitations of capital punishment, such as executing innocents, will be avoided. To sum up, crime punishments reformates offenders, restrain criminals and protects society. By examining capital punishment, it does not perform these roles. More so, the approach does not have social utility but personal and political benefits. It is irrational, and evil since taking life stimulates the crime rate. This is because we decide to stay with the cause by eliminating the effect.

References

Donohue, J. J. (2016). Empirical analysis and the fate of capital punishment. Duke J. Const. L. & Pub. Poly, 11, 51.

Goel, R. K., & Mazhar, U. (2019). Does capital punishment deter white‐collar crimes? The World Economy, 42(6), 1873-1897.

Kovarsky, L. (2016). Muscle memory and the local concentration of capital punishment. Duke LJ, 66, 259.

McRae, D. (2017). Indonesian capital punishment from a comparative perspective. Bijdragen tot de Taal-, land-en volkenkunde/Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences of Southeast Asia, 173(1), 1-22.

Moreland, A., & Watson, D. (2016). Women’s representation and capital punishment. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 37(4), 490-513.

Rubin, A. T. (2016). Penal change as penal layering: A case study of proto-prison adoption and capital punishment reduction, 1785–1822. Punishment & Society, 18(4), 420-441.

Sarat, A. (2018). When the state kills: Capital punishment and the American condition. Princeton University Press.

Seeds, C. (2018). Disaggregating LWOP: Life without parole, capital punishment, and mass incarceration in Florida, 1972–1995. Law & Society Review, 52(1), 172-205.

Udoudom, M. D., Idagu, U. A., & Nwoye, L. (2018). Kantian and Utilitarian Ethics on Capital Punishment. Journal of Sustainable Society, 7(1), 5-11.

Wilson, J. P., & Rule, N. O. (2016). Hypothetical sentencing decisions are associated with actual capital punishment outcomes: The role of facial trustworthiness. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(4), 331-338.