Capital Punishment
This book brings together seven expertsjudges, lawyers, prosecutors, and philosophersto debate the death penalty in a spirit of open inquiry and civil discussion. Here, as the contributors present their reasons for or against capital punishment, the multiple facets of the issue are revealed in clear and thought-provoking like detail like if the death penalty a viable deterrent to future crimes. In confronting such questions and making their arguments, the authors made an impressive array of evidence, called both from statistics and from their own experiences working on death penalty cases. The authors put together considerable experience with both the theoretical and practical aspects of the subject the result is a set of essays of unusual comprehensiveness, variety, and accesability for a diverse public audience.
Haines, Herbert. (1996). Against Capital Punishment The Anti- Death Penalty Movement inAmerica, 1972-1994. Oxford Oxford University Press
Herbert Haines traces the struggle against capital punishment in the United States since 1972. He reviewed the legal battles that led to the suspension of the death penalty and examines the subsequent conservative turn in the courts that has forced death penalty opponents to rely less on litigation strategies and more on political actions. Using social movement theory, he diagnoses the causes of the anti-death penalty movements inability to mobilize widespread opposition to execution. The book concentrated primarily on a time period from 1972. He then described the slow development of anti-death penalty organization and offered an explanation of their victories and defeats during those years.
Lacey, Nicola. (1988). State Punishment Political Principles and Community Values. London, Routledge
Lacey presents a new approach to the question of the moral justification of punishment by the state. She focuses on the theory of punishment in the context of other political questions. Arguing that so far no convincing set of justifying reasons has been produced, she puts forward a theory of punishment centered on the value of the community. It is basically about justification of state punishment. Lacey then discussed the main points, first is that the problem of punishment can only satisfactorily be addresses within the context of an integrated philosophy and second is about the unexamined political and philosophical assumption underlying the traditional theories of punishment.
Laurence, John. (1963). A history of Capital Punishment. New York Citadel Press
John Laurence discusses the history of capital punishment. It is a storytellers journey on how capital punishment began. According to him, it is an unbiased narrative of how people were punished thru out history. He enumerated everything from beheading, hanging, electrocution, guillotine and concentrated cells.
Mitchell, Hayley. (2001). The Death Penalty Contemporary Issues Companion. California Greenhaven Press Inc.
Addresses social problems effectively that assists the process of research by providing readers with diverse essays on current issues such as capital punishment, through personal accounts and case studies, pertinent factual and statistical articles, and relevant commentaries and overviews that death penalty and the capital trial.
Sarat, Austin (1999). The Killing State, Capital Punishment in Law, Politics, and Culture. London Oxford University Press
Comprised of a three-part essay in which the first essay entitled The Politics of state Killing discusses the dialec tics of democracy and death penalty through historical and comparative analysis from past to contemporary American situationcondition. It follows through with Capital Punishment and Legal values expounds on he limitations as well as possibilities of death penalty. And ends with the Death Penalty and the Culture of Responsibility that points out capital punishment and its cultural representations constitute its subjects at the same time enacting a denial of irreconcilable possibilities in changing contemporary community.
Zimring, Franklin and Gordon Hawkins. (1986). Capital Punishment and the American Agenda. Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Zimring and Hawkins gave a clear account of how the current situation of capital punishment in America was reached. They argued that Americans have outgrown the social and political conditions in which capital punishment can continue to be practiced. They pointed out that thirty-two of the thirty-five states enacting new death penalty laws after Furman had capital statures at the time of the decision. For this among other reasons, Zimring and Hawkins believed that the Supreme Court will yet be the instrument of what they firmly predict the abolition of the death penalty in the United States. Lastly, according to the authors, the end to power of the state to execute its citizen represents to them. Not just an evolving attitude toward offenders but a statement about the proper limit on governmental power. This provides countries throughout the world with an index of the degree of recognition accorded to human rights.
Andre, Claire and Manuel Velasquez. Capital Punishment Our Duty or Our Doom. Retrieved from HYPERLINK httpwww.scu.eduethicspublicationsiiev1n3capital.html httpwww.scu.eduethicspublicationsiiev1n3capital.html
Andre and Velasquez provide an in-depth analysis of Capital Punishment and its effects on the society and the people. They argued that Capital punishment is often defended on the grounds that society has a moral obligation to protect the safety and welfare of its citizens. Murderers threaten this safety and welfare. Only by putting murderers to death can society ensure that convicted killers do not kill again. The main point however is that death penalty should be abolished because it is unjust. Justice, they claim, requires that all persons be treated equally. And the requirement that justice be served is all the more rigorous when life and death are at stake. The article clearly showed why the death penalty is unjust because it always inflicts innocent people. While the state, the justice system continue to serve the ruling classes interest, death penalty would be problematic because people will still be wrongly convicted of homicide or capital rape, especially those who belongs to the lower classes. The death penalty makes it impossible to remedy any such mistakes. Since, there is a dominant class that influences moral and cultural norms and judgments, it is somewhat difficult to determine the stakes of having or not having capital punishment implemented. Since the above mentioned class dictates what is morally and politically incorrect or appropriate, but most likely, having capital punishment, in more ways than one, and ruling class identification aside, is a sign of insecurity, that the state must have overlooked its policies most especially its economic relations that to resort to capital punishment doesnt remedy the real issue, of which it is trying to conceal the truth and insecurity.
Bonner, Raymond and Ford Fessended. Absence of Executions A special report States with no death penalty. The New York Times. Retrieved from HYPERLINK httpwww.nytimes.com20000922usabsencesexecutions-special-report-with- no httpwww.nytimes.com20000922usabsencesexecutions-special-report-with- no death penalty.html
Bonner and Fessended presented in this article the twelve states that have chosen not to enact the death penalty since the Supreme Court ruled in 1976 and showed that in these states, absence of execution is effective because according to statistics they have lesser number of homicide. The study by the experts also found that homicide rates had risen and fallen along roughly symmetrical paths in the states with and without the death penalty, suggesting to many experts that the threat of the death penalty rarely deters criminals. Although, this article provided some statistics and it showed how states with capital punishment or death penalty has the same number of homicide rates with states with no death penalty, it does not mean that it is the determinant factor. Other factors affect homicide rates, these includes unemployment and demographics, as well as the amount of money spent on police, prosecutors and prisons. The other factors such as unemployment, demographics, and funds for state apparatuses such as the police, prosecutors, and prison have a common denominator, which is based on the economic condition. This common factor to these other circumstances might have influence the rate of homicide that influence the implementation of capital punishment. The economic situation must be put on the spotlight to further elaborate on the issue, that might be the major root cause of all, if not for most homicide cases. Taking a further step on studying the grounds of economic condition might be a huge impact on not implementing capital punishment.
Volpe, Tara. Does Death Equal Justice Retrieved from httpwww.jmu.eduevision
Archivevolume2essysvolpe.html
For Volpe death penalty should end because it does not deter crime and it risks the death of an innocent person, it costs millions of dollars, it inflicts unreasonable pain and most importantly it violates moral principles. Capital punishment does indeed fail to eliminate crime from the streets the possible execution of innocent individuals outweighs many other concerns. Most capital punishment cases pose great difficulty in the determination of guilt or innocence beyond a reasonable doubt. While many societies have used capital punishment as a way to control crimes rates, capital punishment does properly punishes those convicted of capital offenses. The government should focus more on rehabilitation rather than execution after all, some convicted murderers do feel strong remorse for what they have done. I think that the legal system should require inmates to meet with counselors, or spiritual advisors if they wish, and work to pay their debt to society, while they stay in prison. Prison should be a form of reformation institution. The take on prison being an apparatus or an institution that is about reformation is very positive. It is very much likely to be agreed with because capital punishment per se, does not see the long term benefit and goal of life, and has misconstrued the whole essence of life and humanity. Since capital punishment does not meet the ends of a civilized and moral society, its repeated implementation does not show any remarkable result. But to look forward to rehabilitation and reformation is but a progressive outlook that promises a better society.
National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty. Death Penalty Overview Ten Reasons Why Capital Punishment is Flawed Public Policy. Retrieved from HYPERLINK httpwww.ncadp.orgindex.cfmcontent5 httpwww.ncadp.orgindex.cfmcontent5
The website provided reason why death penalty should be abolished. It is organized by the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, an organization that promotes anti-death penalty campaigns. According to them, executions are carried out at staggering cost to taxpayers. Also it does not defer crimes. Third, it goes against all religions in the world and life without parole is a sensible alternative to the death penalty so it really is not needed. The unequal access of wealth can affect death penalty issues, because almost all defendants in capital cases cannot afford their own attorneys. In many cases, the appointed attorneys are overworked, underpaid, or lacking the trial experience required for death penalty cases. There have even been instances in which lawyers appointed to a death case were so inexperienced that they were completely unprepared for the sentencing phase of the trial. All circumstances with regards to capital punishment is nothing but a losing end to the face of humanity. It works on both sides of the plane, also causing a chain reaction to the whole of the society. It logically encourages a cynical and pessimistic standpoint of society having its members to work hard labor to pay taxes that will kill, what not, their colleagues, having to pay for this worker from his hard earned money to hire lawyers who will take him out of capital punishment charge but in turn will not be able to do so since the institution has long produced lawyers who are incapacitated to get the worker out of the death row, with this chain of events, the society produces an anti-human taste of life. Having this said, the implementation of capital punishment is not an absolute consequence to homicide or murder crimes, and only result to unnecessary funding, and poor economic logistics and relations that shape a backward society.
ProCon.Org. Does the death penalty cost less than life in prison without parole httpdeathpenalty.procon.orgviewanswers.asp questionID001000
This site contains the data about the cost of implementing death penalty provisions. Given the long-time debate on this topic among philosophers, religious leaders, politicians, scientists,and the general publicthe organization decided to devote their time and resources to fully explore the pros and cons of allowing the death penalty and what the cost will be if ever the implementation will push through. The main question in this article is the cost will be if death penalty is implemented, and will it be less costly than life imprisonment. The site provides the pros and cons of the topic but it really promotes anti-death penalty campaigns because it tends to show more negative effects of death penalty than positive effects. There clearly should not have an argument, whether it would be more costly or less for that matter to implement capital punishment. These public and private entities that discuss the logical and practical way of dispensing life should not be the issue. These entities should try to look more on the economic side of state, for having such kind of crimes that are worth implementing capital punishment should be taken to consideration. Determining the root cause is nothing but the core solution to whether implement capital punishment, or may be it is unnecessarily, and it follows that there will be no long, gruesome, and heated arguments on a costly or inexpensive use of capital punishment. In turn, all efforts are worth the cost that measures the strength and limitations of society into a better perspective.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment