StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

Punishment for Crimes - Case Study Example

Cite this document
Summary
The study "Punishment for Crimes" discusses the legal and moral issues that literally are of life and death importance to demonstrate the Supreme Court’s repeated decisions that allow capital punishment is not only just but necessary to maintain justice and a free society…
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER92% of users find it useful
Punishment for Crimes
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "Punishment for Crimes"

The Death Penalty, a Just Punishment Punishment for crimes which are deemed cruel and unusual is forbidden by the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This amendment is often invoked when discussing the legal merits of the death penalty. The use of the death penalty is considered by some to be the most obvious and heinous example of cruel and unusual punishment. Those opposed to capital punishment do not believe that the government should be vested with the power to put any of its citizens to death. Opponents also maintain that the practice is racially biased, overtly costly and does not achieve the intended outcome. Proponents believe it to be neither cruel nor unusual, on the contrary, they think it just and fair. The purpose of this study is to discuss the legal and moral issues that literally are of life and death importance and to demonstrate the Supreme Court’s repeated decisions that allow capital punishment is not only just but necessary to maintain justice and a free society. By definition, capital punishment is not unusual, legally speaking, unless one considers and acknowledges the racial bias that exists in the justice system. Whether or not it is cruel is not definable by law. It can only be defined by the collective social conscious of a culture. The legal interpretation of ‘cruel and unusual’ is somewhat open to debate but in general, the term ‘cruel’ refers to brutal punishments that cause excessive pain. Most legal experts agree that punishments including bodily dismemberment or torture are undoubtedly classified as cruel. Again, terminologies are open to interpretation as evidenced by the current debate at the highest level of government involving the definition of torture. The term ‘unusual’ is commonly understood to define the equitable application of punishment for a particular offense. For example, if ten people were cited for speeding and nine of them were fined $100 but one was fined $1000, this penalty would be considered ‘unusual.’ Taken together, both ‘cruel’ and ‘unusual’ indicate that the punishment should be exacted in proportion to the offense committed. A life term in prison is an acceptable form of punishment but if it were imposed for jaywalking, this would be an unacceptable sentence because it would be considered excessive given the severity of the offense. Excessive is also open to wide interpretation in both the public and legal realm. Some would argue, for example, that imprisonment of any amount of time for ‘crimes’ such as gambling, prostitution and the possession of drugs should be interpreted as excessive therefore ‘unusual.’ The Supreme Court has on several occasions dealt with judging the merits of the death penalty and whether or not it is interpreted by the Constitution as punishment which is cruel and unusual. The Court has always ruled the terminology of the Eighth Amendment does not exclude the implementation of death as punishment. The Constitution is a malleable document, however. The interpretation of the Eighth Amendment has evolved somewhat throughout the years and the Court could possibly reverse this point of view sometime in the future as result of changing societal values. For example, the whipping of offenders was commonplace until the late Eighteenth Century. This practice came to be considered inappropriate because society’s opinion changed to include it as a ‘cruel’ punishment. With respect to capital punishment, though, “the Court has maintained that there remains broad public support for the death penalty as a remedy for the most serious of crimes” (Mott, 2004). Historically speaking, the rational for punishing criminals has been to avenge the crime, to protect society by imprisoning the criminal, to deter that person and other potential offenders from the commission of crimes and to obtain reparations from the offender (Wolfgang, 1998). Throughout the history of civilization, this rational has not changed substantially. The four fundamental reasons society punishes can be classified into two areas. One is to obtain desired consequences which includes protecting society, seeking compensation and deterrence. The other, retribution, or vengeance, involves punishment for a wrong perpetrated on society. The Supreme Court has upheld that capital punishment does not fall under the category of exceptionally ‘cruel’ but has ruled that it does violate the Eighth Amendment if it is considered unusual. In the Furman v. Georgia case of 1972, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was being subjectively applied because a disproportionate amount of minorities had faced execution which made the practice ‘unusual’ (“Furman v. Georgia”, 1972). As a result of the decision, approximately 600 persons on death row had their sentences commuted to life, an infamous example being members of the ‘Mason Family.’ In addition, no executions were permitted in the U.S. until it was again resumed in 1976. However, the majority of death penalty opponents believe that the practice continues to be intrinsically biased against those of lower income and minorities (Olen & Barry, 1996: 272). Protestant and Catholic philosophy have consistently confirmed the right of a fair government to end the life of convicted murderers. The Sixth Commandment in original Hebrew reads not ‘thou shall not kill’ but ‘thou shall not murder.’ The Torah, Judaism’s chief source of ethical reference, is definite in its support of the death penalty. The only law repeated in all five books of the Torah is the condemnation of murderers to death (Prager, 2001). Capital punishment opponents claim that wealthy, white criminals are less likely to be executed than underprivileged minority members of society and if the victim is white or wealthy, it is more likely to be imposed. The statistics provide evidence for their claim. Since 1976, 43 percent of executions in the U.S. have been black or Hispanic. This group accounts for 55 percent of those currently on death row. About half of those murdered in the U.S. are white but 80 percent of all murder cases involve white victims. From 1976 to 2002, 12 whites were executed for killing a black person while 178 blacks were executed for murdering a white person (“Race”, 2003). It would seem that the ‘unusual’ aspect of the death penalty continues to be a valid argument but another aspect must be present for the practice to again be abolished. “There is ample evidence that the death penalty is applied with a discriminatory impact based on the race of the victim, but a constitutional challenge requires intentional discrimination” (Mello, 1995: 933). Opponents also believe a justice system that disproportionately executes its citizens cannot be considered anything but corrupt which devalues the entire system. Opponents of the death penalty argue that the penalty is unjust but proponents disagree with this position because they believe what is truly unjust is the deliberate act of taking of another life, murder. Further, an injustice society should not condone is allowing murderers to keep their lives after imposing the death sentence themselves on another and by that act, also sentencing the victim’s family to a life-sentence of anguish. If someone steals a car, for example, and was allowed to keep and drive it around town without fear of retribution, no one would think that fair. It is it neither fair to allow anyone that steals a life to keep their own. By allowing people who have been convicted of acting as a self-appointed executioner to keep their own life devalues human life on the whole. Again, according to death penalty proponents, sending a murderer away to enjoy three meals a day and a roof over their heads for life simply doesn’t fully address the issue. Death penalty laws have been known to change and probably will again. In addition, people tend to forget the past and parole boards constantly evolve its personnel so there is always a chance, no matter how small, that the murderer will strike again if he is allowed to remain alive. A life sentence imprisonment tends to depreciate with the passage of time as these examples illustrate. In 1962, James Moore raped and strangled 14-year-old Pamela Moss in New York State. Her parents were opposed to the death penalty and asked that he be given life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Moore has been eligible for parole every two years since 1982 because of a change in sentencing laws. In 1966, Kenneth McDuff was convicted in the fatal shooting of two boys in the face and the brutal rape and strangulation of their 16-year-old female friend. A Texas jury sentenced McDuff to die in the electric chair but in 1972 this was commuted to life in prison after the U.S. Supreme Court ruling. In 1989, he was released only to commit at least six more murders which included a pregnant mother of two. He was finally executed in 1998 (Lowe, 2006). Although the U.S. court system is at least among the most equitable in the world, no system of justice can expect to provide perfect results 100 percent of the time. Mistakes are inherent within all systems that rely on the human element for proof and for judgment. The justice system correctly demands that a higher standard be imposed for determinations of guilt in death penalty cases. With extraordinary due-process that is applied in all death penalty cases, the risk of making a mistake is minute. Since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976, there has been no credible evidence provided that confirms any innocent persons have been executed. The more than 100 ‘innocent’ death row inmates that were ‘exonerated’ is a sham. The actual figure of innocent death row inmates is nearer 40 which should be considered in context with the 7,000-plus death –row inmates added to the roles since 1973. Mistakes within the system, though few and unavoidable, should not serve as justification to eradicate the death penalty. We should never disregard the dangers of permitting murderers to kill again (Stewart, 2006). Many proponents of the death penalty believe that it is an option of last resort for criminals that cannot be rehabilitated. They also argue that every murderer executed is one less person that the taxpayers are not feeding and housing. An execution is less costly to taxpayers than the alternative, long imprisonment. They believe “the cost of supporting criminals in maximum security prisons until they die is very high and they feel the innocent tax payer should not have to foot the bill for the care of depraved criminals who’ve demonstrated that they have no respect for society’s laws or human life” (Olen & Barry, 1996: 273-274). Additionally, a lengthy appeals process is a costly process that ties-up the court system. This cost is considered by opponents to be an insignificant argument because the value of human life cannot possibly be broken down into columns on a profit and loss ledger. Department of Justice statistics clearly illustrate that the death penalty contains many constitutional flaws. Between 1973 and 1993, almost half (forty-two percent) of inmates awaiting the death sentence had their sentences commuted or reversed. Capital punishment is “a waste of money and resources in producing what turns out to be counterfeit death sentences in almost one out of every two instances” (McCloskey, 1996: 7). According to those in favor of the death penalty, opponents defy reasonable logic by arguing that the taking a murderer’s life devalues human life. Evidently, they have never had their car stolen and don’t understand the example or they believe that the murderer’s life is more valuable than the victim. Taking away criminals’ freedom is the only way of showing how much we value freedom. Works Cited “Furman v. Georgia.” The Supreme Court Collection. (1972). Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute. October 10, 2007 Lowe, Wesley. “Capital Punishment vs. Life Without Parole.” ProDeath Penalty [online]. (April 13, 2006). October 10, 2007 Mello, M. “Defunding Death.” American Criminal Law Review. Vol. 32, (1995), pp. 933-1012. Mott. Jonathan. “Is the Death Penalty Constitutional?” This Nation. (March 2000). October 10, 2007 Olen, Jeffrey & Barry, Vincent. Applying Ethics. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co., (1996). Prager, Dennis. “Death Penalty Guards What is Valued Most.” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. (June 9, 2001). “Race and the Death Penalty.” Unequal Justice. New York: American Civil Liberties Union, (February 26, 2003). October 10, 2007 http://www.aclu.org/capital/unequal/10389pub20030226.html Stewart, Steven D. “A Message from the Prosecuting Attorney.” The Death Penalty. Clark County, IN: Office of the Clark County Prosecuting Attorney, (2006). Wolfgang, M.E. “We Do Not Deserve to Kill.” Crime and Delinquency. Vol. 44, (1998), pp. 19-32. Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(Death Penalty Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words - 1, n.d.)
Death Penalty Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words - 1. https://studentshare.org/law/1542513-death-penalty
(Death Penalty Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 Words - 1)
Death Penalty Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 Words - 1. https://studentshare.org/law/1542513-death-penalty.
“Death Penalty Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 Words - 1”. https://studentshare.org/law/1542513-death-penalty.
  • Cited: 0 times

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Punishment for Crimes

Why is it necessary to justify the imposition of punishment by the state for crime

On the contrary the approaches of utilitarian differ on the basis that they tend to justify imposition of Punishment for Crimes on the basis that there is a useful purpose which is served by way of the punishment and this approach is sometime known as "consequentialist," or "instrumentalist".... The reason for imposing punishment by the state can be for varying reasons.... Firstly, the imposition of punishment can be very closely related to deterrence and thus punishment to a person who commits a crime allows for deterrence for him as well as other people in the society from committing such a crime again....
1 Pages (250 words) Essay

John Rawls Defends Utilitarianism against a Common

The various types of Punishment for Crimes are constantly changed to be in tune with the changing environment.... punishment is imposed for violations of the laws.... There are many justifications for punishment.... The judge and the legislator have different views in mind in the punishment implementation interpretation.... punishment is allowed to prevent the occurrence of more painful future punishments.... The utilitarian theory of punishment and breaking promises is grounded on the ethics theory the end justifies the means....
5 Pages (1250 words) Essay

Buddhism in Tang Dynasty

The paper "Buddhism in Tang Dynasty" states that it is clear that Buddhism is not the only religion that had effects on politics in China in the 1st Century.... Ideologies of Taoism and Confucianism also had major impacts on the nation's political environment.... ... ... ... Buddhism refers to a religion, as well as a philosophy that focuses on the doctrines of the Buddha (Jacques, p....
7 Pages (1750 words) Term Paper

Violance and the World by Robert Cover and Reflections on the Guillotine by Albert Cumus

Name: Instructor: Course: Date: Violence and the word by Robert Cover and Reflections on the Guillotine by Albert Cumus In his essay, Reflections on the Guillotine, Albert Cumus is explicit on the need to abolish the death penalty as a mode of Punishment for Crimes.... In his essay, Violence and the word, Robert Cover expresses how the rule of law is in itself a form of death and infliction of pain, similar to when offenders commit crimes.... Cover speaks on this topic, citing that the interpretations of law allow for justification of violence and murder of persons found guilty of crimes, which, as Cumus put it, is equal to premeditated murder....
3 Pages (750 words) Essay

Death Penalty: not a detterent to crime

Introduction Capital punishment, also referred to as the death penalty, is the practice of granting a state power to execute an individual as Punishment for Crimes committed (Marzilli, p.... For concerned citizens, the big question is, is it right to sentence to death people who commit heinous crimes?... Indeed, the crimes committed by some people are too grave to deserve leniency.... The permanency of death is also suitable for hardcore criminals who would repeat the same crimes if released....
3 Pages (750 words) Essay

Capital Punishment

Punishment for Crimes which are deemed cruel and unusual is forbidden by the Eighth Amendment to the U.... Capital PunishmentPunishment for crimes which are deemed cruel and unusual is forbidden by the Eighth Amendment to the U.... With respect to capital punishment, though, “the Court has maintained that there remains broad public support for the death penalty as a remedy for the most serious of crimes” (Mott, 2004).... In addition, these crimes are usually committed as a result of impulsive actions and not carefully considered beforehand....
2 Pages (500 words) Essay

Capital Punishments Are Justified

Punishment for Crimes has primarily been implemented for four major reasons: retribution; deterrence; rehabilitation; and social protection.... The changing paradigms of the emerging new pluralistic society have necessitated the need to study the wider implications of punishment for the various types of crimes that are becoming a regular feature of American society.... Despite increasing crimes, I am against capital punishment primarily because it would bring our actions to par with that of criminals....
2 Pages (500 words) Essay

The Scapegoat MAM

They usually undergo through judgment and unfair Punishment for Crimes they did not commit.... No one accepts responsibility for a particular occurrence within the community.... Scapegoating is evident in the case of a crisis in the community.... In most instances, people whom the community treat with little respect....
1 Pages (250 words) Assignment
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us