Ernest Van Den Hagg Summary

Capital punishment according to author, Ernest van den Hagg, is a punishment that should be allowed within a justice system. There are multiple instances where the author gave negative reasons as to why the death penalty should not be a punishment but he gave a valid rebuttal against these arguments as to why it is a necessary punishment. A primary reason I found concerning why the author’s opinion is in favor of the death penalty is equality and fairness, like the “eye for an eye” principle. The guilty individual also assumes all risk and consequences when committing crimes like murder, so Hagg feels like the individual brought this punishment upon themselves. Details about the monetary and psychological costs of the issue are also covered in his article. The strongest argument the author gives within his article is the maldistribution of justice. Looking at most abolitionists, the lives of the criminals is portrayed as having more value that the lives of the victims. These criminals are given leeway with their punishments because the death penalty is perceived as excessive and harsh. Yet, the victim who actually suffered from the incident is the one who is unequally treated. The death penalty is more feared …show more content…
Capital punishment is viewed as excessive and harsh, yet the criminal assumed all consequences when they committed the crime as mentioned earlier. This punishment is argued to be morally degrading to some even though there is nothing that can make the crime committed any better morally. The social consequences are effective with the use of the death penalty for the murderer. The murderer has dehumanized themselves by killing another person, so much that they can no longer live among the living. Even though this may be view as inhumane, Hagg still believes that the punishment is warranted. It’s the only equal punishment for murder he can think of in the