Captial Punishment

Printable View

- 18th March 2008, 14:13
T.Jackson

Captial Punishment

I've spent the past few months studying murderers, rapists and pedophiles for a university assignment on capital punishment for a unit entitled: "Applied Reasoning" Just thought I'd like to share this here with you all, perhaps get some feedback on your views on capital punishment. It's a touchy subject, I handled it diligently to the best of my ability and scored a credit.

Narrative Flow Part:

Capital punishment is viable, warranted sanction for offenders of particularly heinous crimes. Critique reveals that some offenders will never learn, and I say this because American criminal statistics show that well over 50% of all violent felons are actually repeating offenders. (Humphrey 2004) After studying many cases, I’m inclined to believe also that, an alarming portion of violent criminals gradually escalate the severity of their offences overtime. Another assumption, also based from case study is that -- many notorious violent felons commit further, sometimes even worse offences while they’re incarcerated.

Capital punishment does indeed preserve life! I can’t emphasize this enough because research suggests that it does well & truly deter crime. Consequently, from fear of the death penalty, many murderers are more than willing to accept plea bargains before trial, thus avoiding the possible likelihood of life ending consequences being brought upon them. (Keckler 2006)

Sadly, some people just seriously can’t be rehabilitated. Some felons aren’t one bit scared of prison life, not even a life sentence without parole (Keckler 2006) The American state of Carolina is now seeking the death penalty for child sex offenders convicted of raping a child younger than 11. (SBS News 2006) The majority of American’s believe that capital punishment is viably working for them because public opinion polls strongly suggest that the death penalty greatly reduces the crime rate. Interestingly, public support in America for capital punishment has dramatically risen since the late 70’s. Consequently, at current, two thirds of Americans are indeed in full support of the death penalty. (Humphrey 2004)

Arguably, capital punishment has some considerable, positive psychological impacts on society, it sends out a very clear message to the world -- ‘these crimes are just totally unacceptable’. Another psychological repercussion is that the victim’s family no longer needs to live in fear and worry about the felon ever hurting them again. (Personal opinion) All told, capital punishment is clearly a last resort option that should be reserved for some of the ‘worst of the worst’ offenders who are considered to be an ongoing threat, when and only when there is absolutely zero doubt in all minds that they’re guilty.
- 18th March 2008, 23:24
tenaja

Well, you have obviously studied it more than I. One thing I can tell you--is even without all this data, I was all for it. Child rapists--especially repeat offenders--have in my opinion forfeited their right to consuming oxygen.
- 19th March 2008, 01:44
muddy0409

Apart from all other arguments....If you top 'em, they ain't gunna do it again. are they??
- 19th March 2008, 02:34
T.Jackson

Quote:

Originally Posted by tenaja

Well, you have obviously studied it more than I. One thing I can tell you--is even without all this data, I was all for it. Child rapists--especially repeat offenders--have in my opinion forfeited their right to consuming oxygen.

If I was allowed to use pronouns, emotive & colloquial language, that essay would have read a whole lot differently.
- 19th March 2008, 03:29
Archangel

Capital punishment only works if the punishment occurs in a timely manner, given the prison environment especially for pedophiles I believe capital punishment to be a less severe sentence than life.
- 19th March 2008, 04:22
T.Jackson

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe S.

Capital punishment only works if the punishment occurs in a timely manner, given the prison environment especially for pedophiles I believe capital punishment to be a less severe sentence than life.

I initially made a claim like that in the first one I did (the unit consisted of 3 assignments) Unfortunately I couldn't find anything to reference it to, so I lost some marks. I made an insinuation that capital punishment can be the most dignifying thing for some people, because can you imagine how a rapist or pedophile would spend their time in jail? This was of course an attempt to defend the far-flung claim that capital punishment is barbaric. Kinda like putting a sick animal out of their misery I guess.
- 19th March 2008, 06:19
Archangel

I had to have my German Shepard put down, due to advanced Gastric cancer, A shot of pain killer and the potassium chloride, he was gone before he knew it, lights out. Seems like a pretty good way to go. I would sure prefer it to prison.
- 19th March 2008, 08:05
Luciano

What does the phrase "Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" mean to you?
- 19th March 2008, 08:25
T.Jackson

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luciano

What does the phrase "Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" mean to you?

That's an easy one.

1. Eye Witness(s)
2. DNA
3. Motive
4. Possession of victim's belongings
5. The accused's belongings at the scene

Give me 3 or more of those and I'll give you a guilty verdict.
But in a rape case I'd probably return a guilty verdict from just DNA alone and a believable testimony from the victim.
- 19th March 2008, 08:45
Luciano

Man accused of killing his wife.

1. Eye Witness(s) = No.
2. DNA = Yes, this is his home.
3. Motive = Not known.
4. Possession of victim's belongings = Yes, this was her home.
5. The accused's belongings at the scene = Yes, this is his home.
- 19th March 2008, 09:25
T.Jackson

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luciano

Man accused of killing his wife.

1. Eye Witness(s) = No.
2. DNA = Yes, this is his home.
3. Motive = Not known.
4. Possession of victim's belongings = Yes, this was her home.
5. The accused's belongings at the scene = Yes, this is his home.

No jury would convict on that. Those big 5 assume no association with the victim. I think a lot of people would convict with just DNA & motive, when it can be proven that the accused has never been associated in any way whatsoever with the victim. But as for the guy accused of killing his wife goes, the case really needs cold hard evidence like; murder weapon, blood stains on clothing, and a really sound motive. In cases like the one you describe that lacks psychical evidence, the police would be chasing a confession. The other thing to keep in mind is that, without motive, murder is impossible to trial (unless of course the accused is some sort of deranged psychopath) No one commits homicide without reason.