Ernest Van Den Haag A Defense Of Capital Punishment Analysis

Improved Essays
Ernest van den Haag, “The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense of Capital Punishment” (Analyzing Moral Issues, 234-238 in the 6th Ed.)
Ernest van den Haag idea for government role was “securing rights and duties by specifying them through laws and enforcing the laws.” Haag argues that capital punishment is morally permissible on the arguments of retribution rather than deterrence it can be clearly reflected in his work. Ernest also addresses the idea of justice, and deterrence. Ernest van den Haag main point was, if the government should not only have the right to punish but to also enforce more extreme laws. The big law, Ernest was behind was the death penalty and how the government should be able to enforce an eye for an eye type of polices. Van
…show more content…
He stands firm on his first argument, saying that the death penalty is not only the best but the only deterrent to crime. Ernest says the objection of life imprisonment is a light slap on the wrist and is not geared enough. Imprisonment only gives murderers more time to plot and scheme it does not change other criminal minds about making the same mistake. Some opponents of Haag stand argue that people have a right to life and morally we should not use capital punishment. An objection that Haag uses is that the right to life is forfeited if the crime that is broken is severe enough. While the counter argument to this is that some rights should be taken, but to kill another human being is not the only form of punishment. Once a life is taken, it cannot be returned, it’s a dark road that has no return. Some state that imprisonment does nothing to deter the next crime of committing that same crime. So sense the argument finds that life imprisonment seem to be a sensible punishment. While the death penalty is far too harsh because of its finality. This means that capital punishment is not morally …show more content…
He becomes a big supporter of the death penalty which is dominant in his paper where he list different objections to the death penalty than counteracts them. Koch starts off by saying that the death penalty is simply barbaric. The action itself is not barbaric due to its purpose of killing without suffering. A down side of killing people is you cannot take the death penalty back. Once they are dead its over no mulligans, so it should be difficult to make this decision. Koch has a great quote where he says; “If government functioned only when the possibility of error didn 't exist, government wouldn 't function at all.” meaning that government his flawed at all levels and should not be trusted with life. The most important replay Koch gives is does the death penalty cheapen the cost of a life. The death penalty must be seen as the ultimate punishment and not throw around. Yes Koch says if you cannot measure the cost of a human life, but murder can be a ruthless crime, but to condemn another man to death is not only costing that man his life but the emotional weight on the judge jury and the

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    He uses the argument to strengthen his own claim, by saying that instead of it being a valid reason for ending the death penalty, if seen from a different perspective, it is even more justification for extending it. He expresses that “The appeals process for a condemned prisoner is lengthy and painstaking. Every effort is made to see that the verdict and sentence were fairly arrived at” (323). This goes to show that the discrimination factor of the death penalty is no longer the main problem, as the state maintains standards as to how the decision is made and why. Koch explains the unrighteousness of those who may be accused not being held accountable simply because of a few who are speculated to be “favored”, as justice also falls under equality, no matter the circumstance.…

    • 1308 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The death penalty is a controversial topic which receives a great deal of criticism from parties on both sides of the argument. Some suggest that it is morally sound on the basis of an eye-for-an-eye ideology, while others argue that its inherent hypocrisy makes the act illegitimate. By examining and analyzing Igor Primoratz’s A Life for a Life and its argument in support of the death penalty, I will attempt to both explain and discredit his argument on the grounds that murder ought not justify murder. Igor Primoratz’s central argument is that there is no equivalent punishment to murder, which is why in cases of murder, the death penalty is justified. Simply imprisoning someone who committed such a heinous crime as murder does not equate…

    • 1621 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In this paper, I will discuss Nathansons argument against capital punishment. I will discuss how Nathanson has responses to Haags arguments with two cases. I argue that Haag has good responses but I would agree with Nathanson to say that one must treat everyone the same depending on their crimes without treating each criminal differently even though they have committed the same crime but are not getting the same punishment. Haag’s primary objection in capital punishment was that it does not matter if the death penalty is administered arbitrarily because individual punishments depend on individual quilt alone, and whether punishments are distributed equally among the class of guilty persons does not matter.…

    • 1008 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Stephen Bright takes a clear stance when discussing capital punishment. He associates the death penalty with the many other practices which have long been abandoned. These practices include whipping, branding, cutting off appendages, maiming, and other primitive forms of punishment. It is clear that Stephen Bright believes the United States should abandon the death penalty. In fact, his essay is written in a way which assumes that the United States will inevitable abandon capital punishment.…

    • 430 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    He used these quotes in an attempt to show that the death penalty reinforces the idea that there will be retribution for violent actions. However, Bruck drew on these quotes to point out that they do very little to validate Koch’s reasoning. In fact, they do the very opposite by signifying not only an inmate’s remorse, but also their attempt to point out the flawed logic of the death penalty…

    • 1073 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Specifically, a family whose eight-year-old son was killed in the Boston Marathon bombing feels it “prolongs their suffering”. A third reason that aims to persuade people on is death penalties cannot be reversed if a person is eventually proven innocent. Over an almost 40 year period, “more than 140 people sentenced to death have been acquitted of their crimes (sometimes by DNA evidence), had the charges against them dismissed by prosecutors or have been pardoned based on evidence of innocence”. The ability to be one hundred percent certain of someone else’s actions is nearly impossible; therefore the death penalty should not be used. Another reason Mr. Will mentions in the article is the ideological conflict between conservatives and the death penalty.…

    • 790 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The death penalty is the most severe form of current legal punishment. The question that is hotly debated is if this form of legal punishment is just and necessary. Hugo Bedau argues that capital punishment is not ethically acceptable. On the other hand, Ernest Van Den Haag argues that this penalty is completely necessary. This paper will summarize both opinions and give two reasons why the death penalty should be abolished, both from a ethical point of view and from a practical perspective.…

    • 1410 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The death penalty has been a topic of contention since it was introduced among humankind. The two sides of this issue are either for or against it. There are many solid points between the two disagreeing parties that need to be explored to make an informed decision on which side you would choose to support. Two essays I will draw from in this writing are written by Edward Koch, who is for, and David Bruck, who is against it. Both parties have made excellent points in their writings and will be great avenues to explore while making your decision.…

    • 1640 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In 1985, The New Republic released Edward I. Koch ’s essay entitled “Death and Justice: How Capital Punishment Affirms Life” to the public. This essay 's purpose was to sway readers towards a new perspective that affirms the morality and validity of capital punishment. While the article seems effective at first glance, upon further inspection the holes in its message start to become clear. For this very reason, Koch’s essay is a convincing article, yet riddled with logical fallacies and self-contradictions.…

    • 1207 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The morality of the death penalty has long been, and still is a controversial topic in the United States. People have been debating for centuries whether or not this form of punishment should exist. Those supporting it have claimed that the death penalty acts as a deterrent of future crimes. On the other hand, those against it have disproved this claim. Studies show that capital punishment should not be used in the United States, since it does not act as a deterrent, certain groups are more likely to be sentenced to death, and it does not offer closure for families.…

    • 1248 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The death penalty has been around for many years. It has been a controversial argument in the American society. According to the Webster Dictionary death penalty means the decision by a court of law that the punishment for someone’s crime will be death (Webster Dictionary). Over the years people have wondered many times what is the death penalty is, how this punishment works, and who qualify to receive such punishment. Many people are unaware of this social problem; it could be for many reasons.…

    • 453 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Nathanson argues that the decision should be made by the majority. He affirms that while some claim that criminals deserve death penalties for their sins, many regard death penalty as a threat to innocent lives instead of the guilty. Because government’s goal of protecting innocent citizens’ lives is more important than executing harmful individuals, governments should go with the majority and stop executions. Nathanson also argues that the cost of death sentences and execution procedures are far more expensive than the benefit of executing criminals. Finally, Nathanson argues that our legal system is not compatible with capital punishment.…

    • 415 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Stephen Nathanson, who wrote “An eye for an eye?” suggests the factual and moral beliefs about the death penalty are wrong and need to be strictly abolished. The passage states, “ A person’s actions, it seems, provide not only a basis for a moral appraisal of the person but also a guide to how he should be treated”. Also stated, “ What people deserve as recipients of rewards or punishments is determined by what they do as agents”. The argument claiming people should get a punishment based on what they do is accurate. What is not accurate however, is suggesting if someone murders another person, they should receive capital punishment.…

    • 1234 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The key features of the argument on supporting the death penalty developed by Ernest Van Den Haag first focuses on matters of mal-distribution and determining if an individual really deserves it, second the miscarriages of justice, third if the death penalty is a better deterrence than other punishments, fourth the incidental issues that the death penalty promotes, and fifth justice, excess, and degradation. The first argument that Ernest Van Den Haag argues is on the matter of mal-distribution, and determining whether an individual really deserves capital punishment. He expresses his view that mal-distribution being compared between those individuals who are guilty or innocent is undeserved. The acts of capital punishment upon an individual who knowingly commits a crime and is considered guilty in that sense deserves the punishment. However, on the other hand he considers that when mal-distribution is then put upon an innocent life that did not commit the crime but is considered guilty is seen as than unjust.…

    • 1032 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    One of the most debated ethical issues throughout the entire history of man, has been capital punishment (death penalty). Is it necessary, and more importantly, is it moral to put someone to death for a crime which they have committed? This questions has been raised and debated in every country and at every period of time, as far back as known history will allow us to observe. This paper will present and discuss the dilemma of capital punishment on ethical grounds and present arguments both for and against capital punishment. This paper will also look at the history and evolution of capital punishment, as well as attempt to gauge what will become of the practice in the foreseeable future.…

    • 783 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays

Related Topics