Justifiable Homicide At The Hands Of The State Essay, Research Paper

Justifiable Homicide at the Hands of the State

Several problems exist in society today, and we are doing everything we could to

correct these complications and to possibly diminish them. Some are as minor as traffic

violations, and some are as serious as deaths. Many innocent lives are being taken due to

the careless and unforgivable acts of a few people. Something has to be done to stop this

from happening. In other words, we, as society, need to play our part in preventing these

nightmares and tragedies from taking place. This is where capital punishment, which

Webster?s School and Office Dictionary defines as ?punishment by death for a crime; the

death penalty,? can play a crucial role (p 125). The death penalty is a form of punishment

that, when applied in the correct context, is morally and ethically justified by the

philosophies that shape our society. If capital punishment was legalized in all fifty states

and was carried out more frequently, our country?s problems would significantly decrease.

Family and friends of the victim would feel better knowing that the punishment of the

criminal would fit the crime, and less innocent lives would be taken as well (Roark 58).

We are not the first civilization to invoke the death penalty. Both Biblically and

historically, the death penalty was found to be an effective method to end the criminal acts

of convicted offenders. For instance, in ancient Israel, it was socially acceptable to throw

stones at an adulterous woman until she died from the injuries (New Oxford Annotated

Bible 563-OT) . In the colonial periods of our great nation and even in more modern

circumstances worldwide, treason is a crime punishable by death.

Shields 2

In recent times, the culture of the United States has become more humane in its

methods of execution. No longer will crowds of townspeople gather at the square to

witness the hanging of thieves and murderers. Instead, the United States has opted to do

away with any punishment viewed by the citizens and by the Supreme Court as violating

the Eighth Amendment (Lowi and Ginsberg A20) This guarantees every citizens

protection from what the courts perceive as ?cruel and unusual punishment? (Constitution

of the United States, 1791). It is important to note that the 74 men and women that were

put to death in the United States in 1997 were not killed in such a way that could further

detract from their, or their families dignity (U. S. Government: Bureau of Justice Statistics

December 1998)

The methods of execution to be used are delegated by each individual state. Of all

the possible alternatives, only three are found humane in most of the United States

(Bureau of Justice). These are the lethal injection, the gas chamber, and the electric chair.

None of these are considered to be, by many, more painful or dehumanizing than the next.

Some people still choose to oppose these methods too, citing that all form of the death

penalty are ?cruel and unusual?. Such was the case when the Supreme Court decided

against its invocation in the case of Furman vs. Georgia in June of 1972 (Hood 47). (Due

to the court?s decision in this case, many death sentences given prior to 1972 were

reopened. Also, all state and federal laws prescribing the death penalty were thrown out

(Knowenwetter 88).)

Others who choose to oppose the death penalty base their arguments on the fact

that they believe that life, in itself, is a commodity worth preserving despite the

circumstances of the crime. This theory may be valid in a very abstract manner, but only

Shields 3

as long as that abstraction perpetuates. Even the most devout believer in the ?Sanctity of

Life? is sure to consider the options when the victim of some heinous crime is a sibling, a

child, or a parent. Retribution for such crimes at the hands of some monster is sure to be

demanded swiftly by the public as well as the grieving family enduring the loss

Such retribution can also have a second purpose. Davis notes that the death

penalty, like no other form of punishment of those humanely available, has the ability to

deter potential criminals from committing such horrible acts (9-13) Any criminal, whether

or not he is a reasonable man, will consider his options when the consequence of his

actions may lead to his own finality. A finality within itself can be considered yet another

positive bi-product of the application of modern methods of capital punishment. This is

ultimately the fact that a dead murderer will never be given the opportunity to kill another

innocent human being. In fact, there is no case to date where a killer that has been put to

death has ever committed another crime of any degree (Leiser 222-230) The death

penalty, as a form of justifiable incapacitation, is met with no significant opposing

argument.

For decades the philosophical debate over whether or not the death penalty is

justifiable has been a controversy amongst lawyers, authors, philosophers and religious

spokespeople. Numbers of books and articles have been written about the subject and its

relevance to society. Movies have been made about the issue. Dead Man Walking is the

most recent film concerning the issue. This was based on Sr. Prejean?s novel of the same

name. The most difficult points in the debate are that both sides are strongly supported by

valid philosophical and ethical claims. Even more problematic is the idea that each

individual case has to be treated subjectively, without allusion to the events that

Shields 4

have occurred outside of the case context. This makes each and every case context

specific meaning that once the circumstances are brought to question, the debate begins

once again from the beginning.

Capital punishment is one of the most controversial topics of the world today. Many

people feel very strongly about their opinions and will express themselves any way they

can in order to prove a point. Often times though, people may even change their beliefs

after hearing the opposing argument. They may learn information they never were aware

of, which could change their whole perspective on the topic. These controversies could

really be used as valuable lessons to teach people how to listen to the opposing arguments

and then make a decision on what they believe. Sometimes it just takes listening to other

people?s points of view and maybe a little research to make valuable judgments and

decisions that could really affect society.

Bibliography

Shields 5

?Capital Punishment.? The Pocket Webster School and Office Dictionary , 1990

Davis, Michael. Justice in the Shadow of Death. Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield

Publishers Inc., 1996

Hood, Roger. The Death Penalty: A World-Wide Perspective 2nd ed., New York:

Oxford University Press, 1996

Kronenwetter, Michael. Capital Punishment: A Refference Handbook Santa Barbara,

CA: ABC-CLIO Inc., 1993

New Oxford Annotated Bible, New York: Oxford University Press, 1994

Leiser, Burton M.. Liberty, Justice, and Morals: Conteporary Value Conflicts New York:

MacMillan Publishing Co., Inc., 1973

Lowi, Theodore J., and Benjamin Ginsberg. American Government: Freedom and Power

5th ed., New York: W.W. Norton and Company Inc., 1990

Roark, Anthony P.. ?Retribution, the Death Penalty, and the Limits of Human Judgement?

International Journal of Applied Philosophy 13.1 (1997) : 57-68

United States. U.S. Department of Justice. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Washington

GPO. December 1998