Death Penalty

Death Penalty

Introduction

Ever since the beginning of time society has driven ways to punish the offenders committing serious crimes in order to prevent further damage to the society. Criminal are punished to prevent the potential crimes by them in future. Death penalty has long been used as a strategy to counteract with the crimes of very serious nature. It involves executing an individual after she or he has been found guilty of committing a very serious crime by the legal system. This is done either as an act of vengeance, to make sure that the person will not commit future crimes, thereby eliminating the risk of potential danger from society or as deterrent measure to teach lesson to other potential criminals regarding the consequence of committing serious crimes. Countries have long used this form of punishments of putting people to death.

The document argues if putting people to death is the only just way to counteract with serious-natured crimes. The content of the document is designed to explore the arguments supporting and opposing death penalties under the light of different philosophical arguments.

Discussion

Supporting Death Penalties

Usually death penalties are advocated by philosophers who think that it serves as best measure to deter the crimes. It is argued that if executioners are given verdict of death and are put to death, prospective murderers will consider twice before killing for fright of losing their own life (Dieter, 2009). Immanuel Kant, a famous ethic philosopher was typically and emphatically in favor of death penalties when an individual had committed atrocious crime such as murder. Kant plainly advocated that death penalty is one of the most vital reprimands in the arsenal of states. Kant has always been the strongest advocate of using different retribution methods to counteract with crimes. However from ethical point of view he advocated ...