The death penalty is a very controversial topic. In this paper I am going to be talking about the conflicts between liberty and security in the death penalty. Liberty can be defined by the dictionary as, “the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one 's way of life, behavior, or political views” and security, by Policy Paradox definition, means “an ideal of perfect safety and the guaranteed absence of bad things and, therefore, a total lack of worry”. Now the questions become, should people be allowed to take someone’s life in the name of the law, or is this refutable justice on the criminals? Many people would oppose the idea of the death penalty because everyone has the right to live,
…show more content…
Liberty and security as policy goals are ambiguous because people cannot decide whether or not deterrence actually works because there are no proven cases and no one knows how to figure out whether or not crime is stopping because of the death penalty or because of another outcome. In the article it states, “Supporters and opponents also continue to debate the question of whether use of the death penalty acts as a deterrent for other potential murderers. The issue remains unresolved — arguably, unresolvable” (CQ Researcher). Another way the policy goals are ambiguous to the death penalty is that these type of debates are only occurring in states where the death penalty is legal, therefore not everyone is going to have as big of an opinion on the topic, some people might not care as much as others if it does not involve them.
In conclusion, the conflicts between the death penalty vary between liberty and security. Should someone be able to take someone’s life in the name of the law? Is it more important to have liberty or security? Many people are still wrestling with these conflicts today. Supporters of the death penalty are more focused on justice and security for the society, while people who oppose of the death penalty are more focused on freedom and the right to your own
Liberty and security as policy goals are ambiguous because people cannot decide whether or not deterrence actually works because there are no proven cases and no one knows how to figure out whether or not crime is stopping because of the death penalty or because of another outcome. In the article it states, “Supporters and opponents also continue to debate the question of whether use of the death penalty acts as a deterrent for other potential murderers. The issue remains unresolved — arguably, unresolvable” (CQ Researcher). Another way the policy goals are ambiguous to the death penalty is that these type of debates are only occurring in states where the death penalty is legal, therefore not everyone is going to have as big of an opinion on the topic, some people might not care as much as others if it does not involve them.
In conclusion, the conflicts between the death penalty vary between liberty and security. Should someone be able to take someone’s life in the name of the law? Is it more important to have liberty or security? Many people are still wrestling with these conflicts today. Supporters of the death penalty are more focused on justice and security for the society, while people who oppose of the death penalty are more focused on freedom and the right to your own