Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
The death penalty should exist as a deterrent but only in a society where the criminal justice system is aligned with social justice—i.e., in a state where there is no deviation from the way the community views justice and from the way the criminal justice system views justice. Criminal justice and social justice must be in accordance, as Bazelon asserts, in order for a system of law to work, to be fair, to be equitable, and to be effective. In a society where social justice is at odds with criminal justice, the death penalty may not be prescribed as a deterrent to murder because the two systems—social justice and criminal justice—are out of alignment. When social justice and criminal justice are in harmony, the death penalty may therefore be appropriately administered as a deterrent for murder. In this harmony, it is acknowledged by society that the criminal justice system, that the framework of law and order in the community, is moral and justifiable and can and should be respected. Out of this respect comes the acknowledgement that the justice system has the capacity and obligation to exercise force in order to support its laws. A system of rule that does not possess...
Anything that can be considered a serious crime that hurts society or an individual in a traumatic way is something that could be punishable by death. The problem is that the criminal justice system is often too corrupt and self-serving to actually be fair to people in society. That is why there are so many social justice advocates—women like Angela Davis, who opposes the death penalty and the criminal justice system, because she views it as a racist entity that has the aim of oppressing African Americans at its core. For example, she describes the prison-industrial complex as being “accompanied by an ideological campaign to persuade us once again…that race is a marker of criminality” (38). Because of this injustice at the heart of the criminal justice system, society is out of alignment in terms of morals, values and principles, with the criminal justice system. The principle of an eye for an eye has no moral force or bearing…
Functional Theory Approach to Death penalty The functional theory approach to the death penalty is the longest standing explanation for why the death penalty works. Simply put, the death penalty serves a function. The functionalist theoretical approach suggest that death penalty serves a certain function, that is, deterring crime (Weisberg, 2003; Gamson, 1988). This may also be referred to as manifest function. Unfortunately this theory is somewhat debunk, as there is
165). On page 166 Bannister points out that outside of China, the numbers show a decrease in individuals being put to death through capital punishment. In 2006, the number of reported executions dropped to 1591 from 2148 in 2005; also, since 1996 more than 30 nations have "put an end to this cruel and inhuman practice" (Bannister, 170). Conclusion The Chief Editor of Criminal Law Review, Chen Xingliang, writes that there
And such an event, unfortunately, is all too possible, as evidenced by a review done by Bedau and Radelet in 1987. The authors used a variety of published and unpublished sources to locate information on potential capital cases in the United States during the twentieth century. Of the cases identified, Bedau and Radelet found 350 persons who had been wrongfully convicted of potentially capital offenses between 1900 and 1985.
Justice Kennedy, writing for the majority, warned about broader problems with the capital punishment. "When the law punishes by death, it risks its own sudden descent into brutality, transgressing the constitutional commitment to decency and restraint." He took into account the many dangers of the death penalty and concluded it should be restricted to homicides (Death Penalty Information Center, 2008). The main question regarding the research for or against capital
Through which he concluded that each execution prevents around seven or eight people from committing murder (Worsnop 402). In 1985, an economist from the University of North Carolina by the name of Stephen K. Layson published a report that showed that every execution of a murderer deterred eighteen would be murderers (Guernsey 68). While the numbers from these studies seem quite low as compared to the large number of
death: suicide, euthanasia and the death penalty. Looking at certain aspects of each and discussing the issues concerning society. Also providing a sociological out look and economic basis for the arguments. Death: Three Chances Suicide is not a new phenomenon it has been around as long as mankind. The causes of suicide have been discussed on many occasions, and different theories have merged regarding the reason for which someone would commit