Alajmi 1
Abdullah Alajmi
ENGL 102
21 September 18
Death Penalty
In the United States, persons convicted with first degree offenses are given the death
penalty for a long time. However, the utilitarianism theory clearly states that the level of morality
of an action is entirely determined by adherence to happiness as a principle that results in
significant amounts of joy for more people. It is therefore imperative to note that the outcome of
specific actions determines any moral decision. In the wake of practicing death penalty to
convicts, the judicial system is trying to push a form of consequentialism and utilitarianism
which they purport to support democracy on the basis that every individual is the best critic to
personal welfares. Such a move illustrates why the United States should not practice the death
penalty as part of our criminal justice systems. According to all applicable ethical theories and
concepts, the death penalty row should not be full implementation and enforced by the U.S.
While the death penalty targets the culprits of most heinous murders committed with the
highest brutality by conscienceless murderers, it lacks the moral perfection virtue which is
envisioned in any judicial system. Besides, the judicial system should act as a correctional
facility and not a tool of punishing those who commit offenses despite how grave such offenses
may be. However, since the US constitution has no provision making the practice impermissible,
some may argue that it is impliedly constitutional. The fact that the law has not explicitly
contemplated about such unconstitutionality does not make the death penalty a deterrence in
cases where the crime committed are inherently wrong and heinous and merit strict and severe
penalties
Alajmi 2
Furthermore, the death penalty denies the accused chances of appealing against the court
judgment even in situations where they might have been wrongfully convicted. Therefore, to
provide the most significant amounts of equality and liberty that guide peaceful practices and
societal progress, a morally upright action is that which makes many people happy, and the death
penalty is that action. In a real sense, practicing death penalty only causes mourning, sorrow, and
grief as a result of the loss of life which in most cases may have been wrongfully convicted
Death penalty as a way of administering capital punishment to convicts of heinous crimes
is misplaced. It is an opinion that is based on the theory of utilitarianism which argues that
judicial system should act as a correctional facility that prevents future crime. Also, it can be
achieved either through reforming a criminal or offering him/her protection from society but not
by taking away the life of the criminal. Therefore, this paper will argue that the key intention of
the death penalty is to pay for the crimes using the criminal's life but not to offer justice to the
offended families and victims of crimes. It will portray the practice of the death penalty as
having loopholes when used as a tool to deter other criminals from committing murder.
In conclusion, despite the fact that the violation of a right is a violation of morality, it is
not the breach of ethics or amount to a denial of freedom. However, it can be considered as
ethical to abolish the use of the death penalty because of the difficult of ascertaining the guilt of
the accused in most cases. Free will, punishment and moral immutability makes the actions of an
individual to be directly aligned with the consequences of previous events. The role any law is to
ensure the best results for as the victims of crimes. Finally, this paper seeks to clarify that
upholding the death penalty leads to a needless eradication of the lives of convicted murderers
who might have been correctable.
Alajmi 1
Source Evaluations
The first source is Family, ‘I forgive you, but you must die: Murder victim family members,
the death penalty, and restorative justice’ authored by Barrile, Leo in 2015. The article says that
survivors of murder casualties may pardon the wrongdoer yet at the same time push for execution.
The article interviews 52 survivors of family as well as survivors of homicide casualties to discover
their states of mind of capital punishment. These relatives gave reasons which some of the time
negated themselves in open-finished surveys and meetings. Some of them communicated that they
pardoned the wrongdoer yet needed and saw the execution. The creator goes into reasons that the
relatives needed the execution paying little respect to regret. One reason expected that the guilty
party would do it once more. The other reason in the help of execution was justification for the
casualty. Lastly, reason outlined was alleviation from the legal procedure. The article outlines some
help in particular convictions that the wrongdoer ought to be expelled from the public in totality.
The Survivors are the last casualty of these sorts of violations and ought to get justification from
the guilty party for their cherished one.
The second source is the ‘Right about wrongs? Which is A review of Fried & Fried's since
it is wrong and the implications of their arguments on the use of capital punishment’ produced by
Berry, William in 2012. The sources guarantee that profound quality should shape laws. They
make guarantees that torment even with fear-based oppressors isn't right and that observation isn't
right. They do make special cases on observation in a few circumstances with "urgent conditions"
(P. 1679). They make the claim the murdering in self-protection isn't ethically wrong yet at the
same time conveys an ethical outcome. They make guarantees that capital punishment is a type of
torment of knowing one's date of death, disengagement and deadly infusion. These contentions will
help in proving the point that quick equity is the superlative equity.
The third source to be evaluated its "Getting Real About Gideon: The Next Fifty Years of
Enforcing the Right to Counsel" authored by Drinan, Cara in 2013. The article audits law broadly
and outlines some understanding of what it would take to actualize thoughts of progress. The poor
Alajmi 2
people are at a steady danger of unlawful conviction because of the absence of principal
reasonableness, the absence of state monies, and the absence of general society protector's office to
achieve and hold and prepare staff. "The privilege to advice at the state level presently can't seem
to be figured it out. The breadth of suit and principles is mind-blowing. This article gives me
approaches to changing laws and verification to a few focuses. California has been requested to
decrease its jail populace so a survey of laws and arraignment altogether.
The fourth source is ‘Rethinking the Timing of Capital Clemency’ authored by Gershowitz,
Adam in 2014. The article outlines the reasons as to why habeas corpus is supposed to be changed.
There are roughly 15 years between verdict and the authorization of capital punishment. The
procedure is intended to give a reasonable take a gander at how the lawyer for the situation did, and
give the governors and acquittals load up a time to take a gander at the case completely. This article
explains the reasons why this procedure have to change as well as the periods that could be given
by the court in the case and handling of offers and habeas corpus surveys and in addition sparing
the casualty’s family anguish with a drawn-out process.
The fifth article source is ‘Justice versus justice: Geographies of the Death Penalty and
Place-Based Activism in the Troy Davis Case’ written by Kobayashi, Audrey in 2015. This article
asserts that capital punishment is one that is a minority based as opposed to resulting based. The
report goes beyond to explain what nations are contrary to in terms of capital punishment. It
expresses that the Unified Countries are in contrast to capital punishment. Alongside hostile to
capital punishment walks there have additionally been master capital punishment exhibits. The
report gives out a restricting perspective opinion to offer more viewpoints to the paper.
The sixth article source is ‘Administrators' Perspectives on Changing Practice in End‐of‐
Life Care in a State Prison System’ authored by Penrod, Janice, Susan J. Loeb, and Carol A. Smith
in the year 2014. This article underpins my faith in shorter capital punishment activities in that it
would decrease the requirement for end of life watch over a capital punishment case. Other than
that help some portion of this article it doesn't generally go into much for capital punishment cases.
Alajmi 3
As per the article, the age socioeconomics of detainment facilities is changing to a more seasoned
mean populace. The explanation for the age issue is longer jail sentences and existence without any
chance to appeal sentences. There has been a descending pattern with the capital punishment of
genuine executions. The End of life mind is still on the ascent in jail populaces. More enactment is
being sanctioned on the quality of therapeutic care in jails.
The seventh article source is ‘Current issues and controversies in capital punishment’
authored by Richards, Tara N., and M. Dwayne Smith in 2015. This article asserts that as of now
there is a multi-year low of the number of people waiting for capital punishment. Numerous states
are in a ban of capital punishment. Thirty-two states keep on using the death penalty. In this survey
of articles, it examines the clear aberrations in capital punishment cases with sexual orientation,
age versus mental limit, perfect casualties and culprits. There exists a high rate of male against
female litigants in such cases. There exists also some modification of impression of the age to the
litigant as well as their psychological limit at the season of the wrongdoing that can have a change
to the utilization of capital punishment. The perfect casualty has all the earmarks of being a
youthful white female and the perfect respondent a dark male. The last point in this item is the
varying social feeling of understudies in regards to capital punishment when they discover that all
around there is an advancing standard of goodness with the utilization of capital punishment
diminishing. The article did not generally have a position in any way essentially. It finished with
the understudy study making people to trust the creators were not for capital punishment. It had
some intriguing purposes of segregation that may be helpful in the paper.
The eighth article is ‘Duty & the Death Penalty’ authored by Strine Jr, Leo in 2012. This is
a survey of court cases from 2004 to 2009. The audit is of the topography of capital punishment
cases to test the mediation of capital punishment cases. Five states represent two thirds of capital
punishment cases: Alabama State, California State, Arizona State, Florida state, and also Texas
State. Eight states incorporating the above with Pennsylvania State, Missouri State, and Oklahoma
state, represent two out of each three rulings. "Capital punishment cases cost altogether more than
Alajmi 4
non-capital cases" (P. 276). A solitary capital case costs the province around one million dollars.
During the year 2009 the Life verdicts in 13 cases could have spared the country of thirteen million
dollars. The report gives the figures to support the progressions need for capital punishment cases
in money. Having the capacity to demonstrate the cost is vital for most citizens.
The ninth article is ‘Not-So-Harmless Error: A Higher Standard for Mitigation Errors on
Capital Habeas Review’ written by Thomas, Ryan in 2014. This report is on alleviation mistakes
during the punishment period of the death penalty cases. There are two different ways an audit of
mistakes are given Chapman "innocuous past a sensible uncertainty" or Brecht "generous and
harmful impact". The courts still can't seem to choose which ought to be in actuality. The report
inclination for capital court cases is to use the Chapman’s standard of "safe past a sensible
uncertainty". The distinction amongst life and demise ought to have be different. The report again
requests the progressions that should be followed in regard to capital cases.
The tenth and the last source is the article ‘Omnes Vulnerant, Postuma Necat; All the Hours
Wound, the
Last One Kills The Lengthy Stay on Death Row in America’ authored by Tongue,
Megan Elizabeth in the year 2015. The article talks about the measure of time a detainee spends
waiting for capital punishment. This has expanded consistently in the previous 30 years. The
normal remain from 1989 to 2014 was twelve years. Somewhere in the range of 2013 to 2014, the
normal stay was twenty years. The redrafting procedure is the explanation behind this deferral.
There is an interest’s procedure after the underlying preliminary and condemning preliminary. The
interests procedure in the state can be towards the preliminary court judge, at that point to the states
moderate re-appraising court, after that, the state's most astounding court last interest can be to the
Incomparable Law court. Right now the litigant can interest the government offers with habeas
corpus request of then to the offers of United States Court. In the event that the US Court Offers
defeats then the conviction of the case can be repeated and the start of the redrafting procedure
begins once again. Now if all comes up short they can record forgiveness with the representative.
These interests take several centuries. This represents is evidence the way our interest’s procedure
Alajmi 5
needs to change
Purchase answer to see full
attachment