Prison time is an effective deterrent to a point, with some people more time is needed. Prosecutors should have the option of using a variety of punishments in order to minimize crime. The most fundamental principle of justice is that the punishment should fit the crime. When someone plans and brutally murders another person, it would seem that justice would be better served if they too were killed as they had planned to kill another human being. Our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims and this should be altered.
The people that Shelton killed are considered combatants because they support they governmental system and work with it. Based on Just War Theory, the proportionality of killing these people is that their deaths are outweighed by the justice that will bring to the judicial system. Shelton believes the system to be corrupt, focusing instead on conviction rates rather than making sure the right person is placed behind bars. By killing these people Shelton can put a new mindset into the “system” because those affected by the killings will want the right man punished rather since they now know how it feels to be wronged. All the killings made by Shelton were to people who were directly showed how flawed the system was.
This act of murder has been popular along the years but must be stopped now. According to me, execution of a person is just like legal murder and devalues the respect we place on human life. Along with respect, capital punishment also takes away human rights of the convicted. Capital punishment violates articles 2, 3 and 5 of the
This results in poor representation of convicted people in courts and unfair verdicts. Another issue associated with the penalty is that the value of life is lessened. Government should be concerned with the damage inflicted on society when a person is sentenced to be killed by juries. Being put to death by a people does not seem to be that different from a heinous murder committed by a murderer. With all of the media reporting executions like movies, societies become desensitized and accept death penalty as the right way to take care of criminals.
Based on the Best Bet theory we can assume that the risk of losing one’s own life and any potential to ever see freedom again is just as good of a punishment as any other. If not using capital punishment reduces how many are deterred and does not reduce the number of innocent lives taken we too are responsible for the loss of those lives. We are responsible not only for our own direct actions but also for our inaction and the consequences of it. Objections to the death Penalty: Objection 1: “Capital punishment is a morally unacceptable thirst for revenge.” Revenge is a personal response, done out of anger and hatred, which inflicts harm to the perpetrator. Retributivism is an unbiased and impartial response to a perpetrator that has wronged another.
Some crimes are so culpable that death is the only suitable penalty. I believe that the death penalty should be put into effect and if a human kills another human being, they should pay the crime. If someone has enough nerve to take the lives of others, then they too should have their life taken from them. Those are the people that simply do not deserve to live. Life is our most precious possession.
Crime maybe controlled by fear of punishment 4. Punishment that is severe, certain, and swift will stop crime They believed in fast punishment instead of long trials. One of the major parts of criminal punishment reform was for fair and equal treatment of accused offenders. Judges could punish criminals however they wanted to no matter how severe the crime. Mr. Beccaria and other members of the Classical School fought for punishment to be set by legislative instead of judges having all of the authority for punishment.
The only justification for causing death is to prevent the deaths of others. Thus, individuals have the right to use deadly force to save their own lives from criminal aggressors, and countries have the right to wage war to prevent their own destruction. Likewise, a community can and should use capital punishment to protect the lives of its members. Saint Thomas Aquinas wrote: “The slaying of an evildoer is lawful inasmuch as it is directed to the welfare of the whole community.” When judiciously applied as a punishment for the willful killing of innocents, the death penalty serves to deter those who would murder and to protect society from those who have murdered. By reserving the ultimate penalty of death for those who wantonly kill, we are clearly proclaiming our special reverence for life.
He describes lethal injections as too “hospitalized” and would oppose the thought of it. The author later explains that if there was any sort of death penalty there should just be a traditional firing squad. In another argument he also explains that no one takes responsibility for the punishment, and in case of the firing squad the responsibility is just diffused to different groups. He later explains that we have to take responsibility as a people about these capital punishments and that the past really does count. He concludes by saying anesthesia needs to be abolished, and in order to kill a person we, as a people will find a constitutional way to kill them.
An accomplice should be given a sentence but the mastermind who lead the crime should be punished more and should in turn suffer more for the crime they committed. It is important that the guilty person is aware of them being worse off that before in order for the punishment to be effective. This is called experimental harm. Everybody has different triggers and how they do things. And thus the crime due to provocation is not always justified.