ipl-logo

Igor Primoratz's Argument For The Death Penalty

756 Words4 Pages

Igor Primoratz sets forth an argument that to ensure justice in the legal system the utilization of capital punishment is necessary. According to Primoratz there is no punishment of any equivalence to that of murder, whereas for less severe crimes fines and prison time is reasonable. Primoratz argument consists of three defences to common feedback to the action of capital punishment. The one that was most appealing to me being whether it violates the right to life. To this he responds that when the took the life of another human they lost this right; as these right are only given to those who respect the rights of others. This seems absolutely obvious, but can it really be that simple?
Analysis
This argument is set up in such a way as to elaborate his reasoning for being an advocate for the death penalty. He takes the opportunity to take the common arguments against capital punishment and use them to build a case explaining why capital punishment is necessary. He was able to do this through the …show more content…

This concept is similar to stealing a candy bar from a convenient store then feeling guilty and the breaking and entering the same store when it is closed to put it back. Neither murder nor putting other to death is morally right. Understandably the fact of having cereal killers off this planet for good is no inconvenience for us but who are we to decide when another human is to die. This argument also refuses touch on the scenarios of war, self-defence, and abortion. These are all instances that can be considered murder and according to Primoratz murder is murder and that is an inexcusable offence. But we do not put our most honorable war veterans to death for the “murders” they have committed. With that how can this idea of death penalty for all who murder be put into action effectively if not used in all cases. According to Primoratz there is no excuse or reason to permit a murderer of

Show More
Related
556 Words | 3 Pages

Killing people is a horrible thing to do, even if they did thoughtlessly murder a whole family in the middle of the night. It makes you just as bad as a killer then they

Read More
1434 Words | 6 Pages

Oshinsky did a remarkable job explaining the history of the death penalty in a clear and concise way. While the text was fairly short, he effectively provided his readers with well documented and relevant information on how controversial the death penalty has been throughout the past few centuries. He undertook an exceptionally important issue that many Americans do not know much about, or may have conflicting feelings

Read More
1161 Words | 5 Pages

He suggests that other social policies also lead to the death of innocent individuals, but they are not banned. The author presents deductive arguments to support his position, including the idea that murderers who are not executed have the potential to harm more innocent people. He believes that opponents of capital punishment should acknowledge their responsibility for innocent lives lost due to murderers who were not executed. Prager concludes that capital punishment is necessary to protect innocent lives. Opponents should confront their responsibility for every innocent already murdered and yet to be murdered by murderers who should have been

Read More
744 Words | 3 Pages

This paper will serve to show that capital punishment is not, in fact, ethically permissible. I will argue this by explaining the government’s duty to its people, and how capital punishment is indeed a violation of these prima facie duties. 1. The government has a duty to protect its people from harm (including murder, abuse of power, etc.). 2.

Read More
2229 Words | 9 Pages

Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, and the debate about its abolition is the largest point of the essay written by Steve Earle, titled "A Death in Texas”. This form of punishment should be abolished for 3 reasons; First, It does not seem to have a direct effect on deterring murder rates, It has negative effects on society, and is inconsistent with American ideals. To begin, the death penalty is unnecessary since it is ineffective at deterring rates of murder. In fact, 88% of the country's top criminologists do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent to homicide, according to the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. In opposition, supporters may argue that it may indeed help to deter murder rates as they have

Read More
1646 Words | 7 Pages

The topic of capital punishment presents a test of values. The arguments in support of and opposition to the death penalty are complex. In the end, this is a question of an individual’s values and morals. The topic requires careful thought to reach a reasoned position. Both sides of the argument are defensible.

Read More
1449 Words | 6 Pages

There will be some individuals who stand behind it, some who do not, and some who prefer other options like solitary confinement. Sentencing one to death out of fear of what they might be or what they could become is not a reason to end someone’s life. Those who are on death row have to spend days, months, or even years waiting; waiting to hear if might be released or if their execution date has been set. If an individual has committed such a barbaric crime, the court should not stoop to their level and commit murder. Outsiders, who have never stepped a foot in prison, do not know what it is like.

Read More
901 Words | 4 Pages

The first objection is that the death penalty does not "provide a measure of moral desert" (Nathanson). For the second, Nathanson states "it does not provide an adequate criterion for determining appropriate levels of punishment." The main objection is an "eye for an eye", or Lex talionis, and I believe it fails to support equality retributivism and creates punishments that are morally unacceptable. There is no way that

Read More
508 Words | 3 Pages

Killing another seems very unjustifiable, which might be the case but when someone takes another 's life and sent to prison, death row or capital punishment is needed to put that person were they belong. People like that deserve to die because of their mistake of killing another and it deters other people to not kill others, showing them what would happen. In the case of Capital Punishment, Hunting for Sport, or George and Lennie, killing is a justifiable act. In the case of capital punishment killing is justified and needs to be done. For example, “Some crimes are so inherently evil they demand strict penalties up to and including death”(McClatchy).

Read More
1145 Words | 5 Pages

This article discusses individual cases and crimes and gives analysis of the arguments made against death penalty in real world. Firstly it discusses the deterrence argument while going through a number of cases. The conclusion is that it has no effect on reducing homicides but ironically it breeds violence as in some cases offenders committed a capital crime in a territory where execution still prevails while they could have easily avoided it. Second thing discussed is the cost, the research in article shows that it costs significantly more money to put a convict to death than to incarcerate him for life in a prison. Moreover it is shown that in many cases criminals are executed while there are reasonable doubts in their convictions and some have avoided execution by just a few hours before being exonerated.

Read More
551 Words | 3 Pages

The late, Louis Pojman, was a great American philosopher, who was known for his many writings such as A Defense of the Death Penalty. The death penalty has always been a very touchy subject for most people. People have their views of what they consider right or wrong. Philosopher Pojman was pro-death penalty, so naturally he had some who agreed with him and some that did not. As I read the “Best Bet” argument my opinion of murderers is that they deserve to be killed for their horrid actions.

Read More
706 Words | 3 Pages

Also, if society does not sentence an offender to death, they are an accomplice to that crime (Avaliani, 2004). Criminals that kill should suffer the same fate as their victims. The punishment should,

Read More
773 Words | 4 Pages

5 Side Hustles You Can Start Today A side hustle is anything you do outside of your normal job to earn extra money. Having a side hustle can jumpstart your finances in a way that nothing else can. Even just an extra few hundred dollars a month can make a huge impact on paying off debt or funding an emergency fund.

Read More
767 Words | 4 Pages

Death penalty is like the ‘’tooth for a tooth – eye for an eye’’ theory. Instead of acting inhuman to our fellow beings we should find a better way to solve the mind of criminals. Making the problem vanish is not a good idea. We should do psychological researching instead! I, myself have a lot of faith in humanity.

Read More
1048 Words | 5 Pages

In the case of the death penalty, it has the added bonus in guaranteeing that the person would not offend again. Supporters of harsh punishments argue that the would-be criminal would consider the costs versus the benefits of committing a crime. If the costs outweigh the benefits, then it is assumed that he would stop what he is doing, effectively ‘deterred’. Furthermore, the usage of harsh punishments to effectively deter crime is ethically justified as it prevents more people from falling victim to crime. However it is extremely difficult to judge a punishment’s effectiveness based on its deterrence effect, consequently we must consider other variables that would entail a person to commit a crime.

Read More

More about Igor Primoratz's Argument For The Death Penalty

Related Topics

Open Document