Capital punishment, or the death penalty, is punishment by execution of someone officially judged to have committed a grave and capital crime BY THE STATE. I say this because the “State” is an abstract entity, it is not like an individual killing another individual (although in the ONION video this is alluded to in that no one actually kills the criminal, the machine takes care of it). Over the years, this has ranged from firing squads, hanging, electrocution, gas chamber, or lethal injection. What is up for debate currently is whether lethal injection itself is cruel and unusual as well, so the question here turns to methods as well as the act.
Key terms:
Abolitionists: Those who are for the complete abolishment of the death penalty, based on human rights in violation of the 8th Amendment “cruel and unusual punishment” clause.
Retentionists: Those who wish to retain the death penalty as a viable legal option, but use it sparingly and for the worst of cases
Retributivism: Those who argue offenders deserve to be punished, or “paid back” for their crimes and punished in proportion to the severity of their offenses. In other words, justice, or retribution.
The death penalty has also been banned in most countries in the world based on human rights arguments. It is not illegal here and certain criteria must be fulfilled in order to even be considered for the death penalty in the United States, defined as:
1.) First degree murder (killing with premeditated intention)
2.) Committed while during another crime, such as rape or robbery
3.) Involving multiple victims or special circumstances, like children or state officials; particular heinous nature of the crime, treason and terrorism. (As a side note, multiple victims in capital punishment include pregnant women in any trimester, so the fetus is considered legally a person here but not under abortion).
Legal Framework:
Furman V. Georgia: (1972) The Court ruled that capital punishment as practiced in certain states was unconstitutional, in violation of the 8th Amendments “cruel and unusual” clause. They ruled, not that the death penalty was intrinsically unconstitutional, but the methods were violative. This in effect put a stop to all executions.
Gregg v. Georgia: (1976) The Court again rules that death penalty laws that followed “proper guidelines” were constitutional. States have to take reasonable measures to ensure protection under the 8th Amendment. This is effect re-instated the death penalty and the law has been upheld ever since with certain modifications.
1.) Execution of the mentally retarded is unconstitutional because they lack the competence – this has become the insanity defense over the years.
2.) Minors (under 18) can not receive the death penalty for the same reasons. Before this, the majority of states had no minimum age or it was as low as 14 years old.
3.) All other methods of the death penalty are banned, ushering the age of lethal injection. Some states today still retain firing squad as an option.
Utilitarianism argues strictly according to deterrence, the notion that putting criminals to death will, in theory, deter other criminals and therefore promotes more social welfare. Even life in prison is not enough of a deterrent for the utilitarian. The problem here is establishing deterrence as a non-moral statistical fact. It has to be proven that a death penalty jurisdiction has less crime than a non-death penalty jurisdiction and even that depends on many other social factors.
I want you to be careful with Kant – he himself in other writings defends capital punishment based on notions of Justice – we respect people’s natures as being free rational autonomous and equal BY PUTTING THEM TO DEATH, because they had a choice not to kill and they did anyway. IN a sense, Kant argues you lose LEGAL personhood, thereby allowing the state to execute you. But, that is different from using the framework of the categorical imperative strictly. Here, it is prohibited to kill and use a person as a means to an end.
After reading your e-text chapter on capital punishment and watching the following video links, please answer the following: (If the links do not open, simply copy and paste into your browser)
Links: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfsMMVgIToA
Links: https://www.cbs.com/shows/60_minutes/video/c77u_9DB_JMZCukdtURkP9SUu0TFLlK8/from-the-archives-60-minutes-first-pelican-bay-report/
1.) What is your belief about capital punishment? Do you find the utilitarian argument pro-death penalty regarding deterrence convincing?
2.) Do you think the State has the moral and legal right to execute a convicted criminal? Explain using your moral theories.
3.) State your reaction to the Onion Video, i.e. the methods of the death penalty. (Note: the Onion is completely satirical, but the video does force you to think about the humaneness of lethal injection and that machines will be able to now do what prison officials used to have to do, or at least sometime in the future.)
4.) What is your belief regarding solitary confinement? Is this more “cruel and unusual” then the death penalty itself?
Previous answers to this question
This is a preview of an assignment submitted on our website by a student. If you need help with this question or any assignment help, click on the order button below and get started. We guarantee authentic, quality, 100% plagiarism free work or your money back.