The death penalty in the US

Introduction

Punishment in the criminal justice system refers to the response to crime that aims at restoring and protecting our rights through punitive restoration. Punishments and corrections of criminal actions include capital punishment, serving a jail term, rehabilitation, community service, paying fines and so on. The use of death penalty to punish violators has led to a passionate and enduring debate all around the globe, as policy makers, religious groups, scholars, human rights activists and other stakeholders give contrasting opinions about the issue. As the important debate of the death penalty continues around the world, many nations have abolished capital punishment including all NATO members except the United States. Today, the Federal government and 34 states in the US still endorse capital punishment as a form of punishing condemned criminals. In the history of the United States, up to the nineteenth century, the execution of criminals who have been convicted was a local and public ceremony. The first recorded execution in the US colonies took place in James-town, Virginia, in 1608 in which Captain George Kendall was shot by a firing squad. Over the years, the death penalty has gained and also lost support in the US. In this paper, I will argue that Van den Haag’s position for capital punishment in the US fails.

II. Summarize the first argument you oppose

The first argument of Van Den Haag for capital punishment is moral, in which he argues that the death penalty is just for certain offenses. The author gives an example of two criminal activities namely premeditated murder of treason and claims that they are grave and horrible violations that deserve no other punishment except capital punishment. According to Van den Haag, only the death of the offender is proportionate to the gravity of the crime committed. The oldest example of this justification of the death penalty is the "eye for an eye" principle of retaliation that when is applied to murder implies that "a life for a life."

III. Explain why the first argument fails

The argument by Van den Haag in which he advocates for the death penalty because it is just is opposed by abolitionists who argue that capital punishment is unjust for any offense and is inconsistent with human dignity. The argument fails because the society has no right to impose such as inconsistent punishment with human dignity. The argument by Van den Haag also fails because the strict application of the "eye for an eye" formula is inadequate. An example to support this argument is that if a mass murder kills ten people, then killing the offender is not regarded as punishment in kind.

IV. Summarize the second argument you oppose

The second argument for capital punishment by Van den Haag is that a death penalty is an effective approach to deterring individuals from committing crimes in the future. Capital punishment is a sure way to ensure that the offender does not commit the crime again as it brings total incapacitation and also is irrevocable. The author argues that the more the punishment, the greater the deterrence; hence, similarly the death penalty leads to more deterrence when compared to other punishments. According to Van den Haag, life in prison is not the same as the death penalty because life in prison is still life whereas capital punishment threatens to take the life away. Also, life in prison does not ensure total deterrence, as an offender can escape from prison and commit the crime again or also commit murder of fellow detainees or prison officers.

V. Explain why the second argument fails

The second argument of Van den Haag fails because there is a weak current evidence to support the deterrence value of using capital punishment. It cannot be proved that as the number of executions increased, consequently leads to the proportional increase in the number of victims’ lives saved.

VI. Consider an objection

Advocates of the death penalty in the US may oppose my opposition in III in which I argue that capital punishment is unjust, by claiming that when people commit serious offenses, they forfeit their rights to life thus allow for execution. The concept of rights forfeiture is appealed as a justification for other kinds of punishment such as serving a jail term, in which it states that if a person commits a violent crime, they forfeit their liberty rights thus can be denied their freedom of movement and expression. The objection in V can be opposed by claiming that evidence of the impact of capital punishment on society can be proved through comparing the crime rate in states that endorse and those that have illegalized the death penalty.

VII. Reply to that objection

The objection is a good one because it refers to the concepts of rights forfeiture; however, as a civilized society, it is time to abandon the rationale of "an eye for an eye," which was a relic of the less civilized society. The second objection in which evidence can be acquired by comparing states that use capital punishment and those that do not is wrong because the other main socio-economic factors influence crime rates in the society.

VIII. Conclusion

Therefore, the death penalty should be abolished in the United States because it is a fundamental violation of the right to life because it is a cruel, inhuman and degrading form of punishment. Besides, capital punishment has not demonstrated effectiveness in the states that endorse it as a form of punishment.

Sherry Roberts is the author of this paper. A senior editor at Melda Research in research paper company if you need a similar paper you can place your order for a custom research paper from nursing papers for sale.

"Janet Peter is the Managing Director of a globally competitive essay writing company.