I think he wanted to do this so that no one would figure out what he was really trying to do. He especially did not want Claudius to find out that he was trying to prove his guilt in the murder of his father, most likely in fear that he would do the same to him once he knew. This shows that he was being careful and cautious. The reason that Hamlet waited so long to act upon Claudius and get revenge was not because he couldn't decide when or how to do it, but because he wanted to make sure that Claudius really killed his father and was first proven guilty of it. He couldn't just kill him because of what a ghost had told him, most people would never believe that.
Deterrence is an act or process of discouraging and preventing an action from occurring. When potential killers know that the cost of their murderous action can result in their own death, they are much more hesitant and more likely to reconsider their plans. Murderers are selfish and sick-minded people who have no consideration of others. Isaac Ehrlich puts it perfectly, “ if one execution of a guilty capital murderer deters the murder of one innocent life, the execution is justified.” Therefore, capital punishment should be strictly enforced and legalized.Capital punishment also provides protection to the society. Philosopher Jackues Barzun compares such criminals to wolves.
They seem to be indifferent to the fact that they have killed someone because assassination merely becomes their ‘job.’ In a similar manner, Generals Die in Bed by Charles Yale Harrison, is inclusive of the same insensitiveness and indifference towards the death and murdering of people. The narrator says, “I lunge forward aiming at his stomach. It is a lightening, instinctive move…I become insane…I want to strike again and again.”(Harrison, 26-27) Since this was an “instinctive” move, he didn’t even think over the fact that he is taking someone’s life nor have any humane feelings which prove that he has become inhumane towards a person’s life. In addition, a humane individual would experience feelings of regret and guilt, but instead he has the urge to stab him continuously. He becomes one of the negative byproducts of the war because it causes him to become “insane” and inconsiderate towards the sentimental values associated with death.
A Defense of the Death Penalty Louis P. Pojman The death penalty serves as both a deterrent for would be murderers and a fitting punishment for those who intentionally and out of malice take the life of another human being. Retribution: It is sometimes argued that the death penalty serves as a form of revenge for the victims of heinous crimes. For those who argue from this stance, revenge is never the proper method for assigning punishment because it is done out of anger and with the intent of inflicting harm upon another human being. Vengeance itself is not the basis for designating the death penalty. Instead retribution is justification enough, although it may be accompanied by feelings of anger and hatred.
His blood soothed my chapped hands” (Martel 345). Christianity, Islam, and Hindu are religions that teach that killing people is wrong. Seeing as Pi practices each of these religions, he directly goes against these beliefs when he kills the cook. Pi's actions, however, are necessary for his survival, and a good illustration of his courage. While others may have shied away from breaking the rules of their religion, Pi shows the personal courage to act in a new and unusual way to survive.
Oedipus then accuses Creon of sending Tireseas to make Oedipus think he is the murderer. After Oedipus accuses Creon he tells him, "I do not desire your banishment-- but your death." The death of Laius would never have occurred if it were not for Oedipus's short temper. Oedipus forced King Laius off the road because his procession wouldn't make way for Oedipus and his group. If Oedipus had thought things through he would have never have acted so irrationally and killed King Laius.
To begin with, Wargrave tries to bring justice to innocent victims, but ends up breaking the law in the process. He chooses to kill the guilty who cannot be touched by the law in order to avenge the lives that were lost due to those people. Justice Wargrave has no right to choose the punishments of individuals at fault, no matter how horrible the crime one has committed. But, he
However, Montresor does not simply want to murder his companion. Not only will he escape clean of his revenge, but he would also make his victim suffer, to feel
As people state “to take a life when a life is lost is revenge, not justice”. This suggests there is no humanity in the area, as everyone just wants vengeance. While many argue this is where theory of deterrence comes in. But they should answer the main question, how are people able to amend by witnessing wrong? Instead it brutalises the society and increases murder rates.
He felt that killing him himself was the right thing as Lennie was his responsibility and if he didn’t, he would get tortured by the other ranch workers. This was similar to Carlson killing candy’s dog, when candy then afterwards realised he should’ve done it himself. Killing Lennie was a hard and distressing thing for George to do as it says, “The hand shook violently”, maybe showing regret or even determination to get it over and done with. George killed Lennie because he had to. The conflict between Lennie and Curley was distinct and noticeable throughout the whole story.