ipl-logo

The Rescue Defence Of Capital Punishment By Steve Aspenson

744 Words3 Pages

Capital punishment has long been a heavily debated issue. In his article, “The Rescue Defence of Capital Punishment,” author Steve Aspenson make a moral argument in favor of capital punishment on the grounds that that is the only way to bring about justice and “rescue” murder victims. Aspenson argues as follows:
1. We have a general, prima facie duty to rescue victims from increasing harm.
2. Murder victims are increasingly harmed by the continuing life of their murderers.
3. Therefore, we have a prima facie duty to rescue murder victims by promptly ending the lives of their murderers.
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. Murder constitutes harm and abuse of power.
3. Capital punishment is murder
4. Therefore, capital punishment is unethical as it violates the government’s basic duty to protect its people.
I will use both W.D. Ross’s Prima Facie Duties …show more content…

Ross came up with a list of seven basic prima facie duties as they apply to individuals. These duties included a duty to (1) reparation, (2) fidelity, (3) gratitude, (4) justice, (5) beneficence, (6) self-improvement, and (7) nonmaleficence. Tom Regan’s Rights Theory stems around the idea that every person has four basic, semi-universal rights: (1) the right not to be harmed, (2) the right to aid when their rights have been violated, (3) the right to self-defense, and (4) the liberty right. In this paper I will also discuss Tom Regan’s worse off principle. When applied to the Rights Theory, the worse off principle states that should rights conflict and the harms to one party be significantly worse than the harms to the other, then the rights of the better off should be

Show More
Related
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
522 Words | 3 Pages

Nathanson uses his essay, Does It Matter If the Death Penalty Is Arbitrarily Administered, to combat the notion that capital punishment is an effective outcome for criminals. It is my goal to propose that capital punishment in itself is as fair outcome, and point out that it should remain established as long as the ones sentencing criminals to this fate are held to higher, more fair standards. The driving force behind Nathanson’s argument against capital punishment is statistics. While no one comes forth to outright say that race plays an important role in the decision on who receives capital punishment, there are statistical findings put forth by Bowers and Pierce state that killers of whites have the highest chance of being executed

Read More
729 Words | 3 Pages

Introduction: Despite the common misconception that capital punishment leads to a safer and utopian society, research provides evidence that there is no correlation between the two. During 1972, the Supreme Court of Georgia ruled against the use of capital punishment in the Furman v Georgia case. This ruling arose after three African Americans were put on stand after being accused for different cases of murder and rape. Although death penalty was already imposed for these three cases, the court decided that death was “cruel and unusual” and consequently abolished the use of it.

Read More
582 Words | 3 Pages

The capital punishment is well supported in this article. It clearly shows how ethos, pathos and logos support the why the capital punishment should be kept and not taken away. The reader is heavily given enough information to go towards the side of keeping the capital punishment. While there is little information why the punishment shouldn’t be used its not supported as well.

Read More
219 Words | 1 Pages

The essay, “Death and Justice: How Capital Punishment Affirms Life”, written by Edward I. Koch is written to persuade the reader to accept the favor of the death penalty. The writer not only states a variety of facts, but he also tries to generate sorrow or even anger at times. He expresses different topics that lead to these emotions throughout the text by using ethos, pathos, and logos. Koch was successful at making the reader favor the death penalty not only because he used these techniques, but he also kept the reading concise. Another solid reasoning that Edward I. Koch uses that mixes with the internal emotions is pathos.

Read More
405 Words | 2 Pages

The University of Texas-Pan American Essay #2 Anna Salkinder LSPI July 27, 2015 The death penalty has been a major topic of debate in the United States as well as various parts of the world for numerous years. At this time, there are thirty-one states in which the death penalty is legal. Nineteen states have completely abolished it (“States with and without The Death Penalty”). Since its initial development back in the 1600’s, the death penalty has taken a different course in the way it is utilized. In its early days, the death penalty was greatly used and implemented for several offenses.

Read More
901 Words | 4 Pages

Death Penalty is a very ominous punishment to discuss. It is probably the most controversial and feared form of punishment in the United States. Many are unaware, but 31 of the 52 states have the Death penalty passes as an acceptable punishment. In the following essay, I will agree and support Stephen Nathanson's statement that "Equality retributivism cannot justify the death penalty. " In the reading, "An Eye for an Eye?", Nathanson gives objections to why equality retributivism is morally acceptable for the death penalty to be legal.

Read More
1145 Words | 5 Pages

Annotated Bibliography Draft Student name : Haider Zafaryab Student number: 2360526 Thesis Statement : Capital Punishment is a very controversial topic around the globe. I believe that it does more harm than good and breeds violence in society. Source 1: Radelet, M. L., & Akers, R. L. (1996).

Read More
298 Words | 2 Pages

A second disputation of those who advocate capital punishment is that it is “just and moral”. One of those who believe this is Casey Carmical, who is professional translator and blog writer of website called “Casey 's Critical Thinking” pertaining to current social and political issues. In article “Capital Punishment Is Morally Justified”, Carmical confirmed that “the purpose of the

Read More
667 Words | 3 Pages

It’s unfortunate that these individuals had to face this by themselves, without the proof, evidence, and validation. Capital punishment treats murders with more mercifulness and pride than the victim the murders has killed. The death penalty is the simplest method to cleanse the nation. Criminals would fear the action of government is willing to do. The act of crimes would decrease profoundly.

Read More
1229 Words | 5 Pages

Death Penalty: Constitutional, Cost Effective, and Retribution The public view of the death penalty as being the appropriate punishment for a capital crime has shifted back and forth multiple times in the last century. The ruling by the Supreme Court in 1972 found the existing death penalty statutes and not the death penalty itself-unconstitutional (Sheherezade C. Malik & D. Paul Holdsworth 2015). Many states performed a legislative reform and did reinstate the death penalty as a legal and constitutional method of punishment for capital crimes. However, there are still many people that argue the constitutional aspects of the death penalty, the cost of proceedings and the retribution versus revenge for the victims are reasons to dissolve the

Read More
953 Words | 4 Pages

No one deserves to die. When the government metes out vengeance disguised as justice, it becomes complicit with killers in devaluing human life and human dignity. In civilized society, we reject the principle of literally doing to criminals what they do to their victims: The penalty for rape cannot be rape, or for arson, the burning down of the arsonist's house. We should not, therefore, punish the murderer with death... Capital punishment is a barbaric remnant of uncivilized society."

Read More
706 Words | 3 Pages

Even though it is true that taking the life of another is not right, it is even truer that the punishment should fit the crime. The death penalty is an exercise of justice that promotes retribution for crime and moral punishment for those who choose to take human life. Also, it prevents society 's worse offenders from re-offending, and it provides justice for the victims whose lives were cut short without a second thought. To better understand why capital punishment is a justifiable act, Kant 's theory gives a clear and logical understanding of the eye for an eye approach. Additionally the utilitarian view also explains why capital punishment is justifiable in regards to comfort for the victim 's family and prevention of re-offending.

Read More
2129 Words | 9 Pages

There are numerous things in this society which ought to be banned however the death penalty is not one of them. It is most likely the right approach to go the extent that capital order is concerned. At this moment in our nation, I think that it crazy that criminals believe that they can escape with pretty much anything. My argument for this essay is that death penalty is a resource for society; it discourages potential criminals and also serves retaliation to criminals, and is not the slightest bit indecent. The death penalty can be a greatly valuable device in sentencing criminals that have perpetrated a portion of the most exceedingly terrible crimes known to society.

Read More
767 Words | 4 Pages

Why death penalty must end ‘’An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind,’’ said Mahatma Gandhi. The execution of someone who has possibly done a crime is an inhuman act. Death penalty is hypocritical and flawed. If killing is wrong, why do we kill when a criminal has done the crime of killing someone? In this essay, I will write why death penalty should end by writing about the violation of human rights, execution of innocent people, the fact that it does not deter crime and money.

Read More

More about The Rescue Defence Of Capital Punishment By Steve Aspenson

Related Topics

Open Document