Capital punishment is described as a government sanctioned punishment where a person that has committed a crime is put to death by the state. This sentence is commonly used toward people who have committed awfully high offenses such as murder, war crimes, and crimes against humanity and genocides. It dates back to the 1500's where this was seen as the just way of law that made criminals pay for their crimes in front of an entire community. Back then they used methods of hanging, stoning, and lashing these people, their main purpose being one, to maximize the general balance of pain and pleasure towards society. There are certain actions that we can take into our hands and those in which the law plays an important role. When speaking of capital
…show more content…
It has been argued over the years that capital punishment violates the eight amendment in the Constitution of the United States of America. It was argued that because the eighth amendment states that no cruel and unusual punishments should be inflicted upon anyone, so, capital punishment should not be used as a form of paying for a crime. What is not being taken under consideration, however, is the fact that the law has been morally and properly assessing these cases. How so? Well, lets begin by stating that the Supreme Court ruled in 1976 in the Gregg v. Georgia and Jurek v. Texas, that a death sentence did not violate the eighth amendment as the forms of execution have been reformed so that the punishments are not categorized as inhumane and cruel. The person sentenced to death will not feel any pain, and will be attended with proper medical attention through the process. The lethal injection is what the law now uses as a form of capital punishment to induce death in the least painful and most delicate …show more content…
For example, a father who is alone with three children and is in the border line of losing his job and children may push him to get involved with criminal activity such as theft or selling drugs. We could also use the example of a woman who is in fear of her current partner, as this person rapes her and physically abuses her and the kids. This mother in desperation would most likely also end up involved in criminal activity, killing the man who is always hurting her and her children. These two scenarios of course would result in both victims ending up in jail and serving a possible life in prison. In these two cases capital punishment wouldn't be a good choice as it wont seek the greatest good. Why? The law would need to understand the circumstance of the actions, the government could probably invest into programs to help fathers in this situation find a job to sustain their family, and they could invest in better protection programs for women that are abused. It would not prove to kill them for what they have done, as their intention was a means to survive and to hurt the community clearly demonstrating the principle of utility. In the case of Terese Lewis, age 41, maliciously planned a scheme to gain $250,000 in life insurance from her husband, hiring two men to murder both husband and stepson while she stood in the kitchen to watch in their home in Virginia. Capital punishment, which was
It has been argued over the years that capital punishment violates the eight amendment in the Constitution of the United States of America. It was argued that because the eighth amendment states that no cruel and unusual punishments should be inflicted upon anyone, so, capital punishment should not be used as a form of paying for a crime. What is not being taken under consideration, however, is the fact that the law has been morally and properly assessing these cases. How so? Well, lets begin by stating that the Supreme Court ruled in 1976 in the Gregg v. Georgia and Jurek v. Texas, that a death sentence did not violate the eighth amendment as the forms of execution have been reformed so that the punishments are not categorized as inhumane and cruel. The person sentenced to death will not feel any pain, and will be attended with proper medical attention through the process. The lethal injection is what the law now uses as a form of capital punishment to induce death in the least painful and most delicate …show more content…
For example, a father who is alone with three children and is in the border line of losing his job and children may push him to get involved with criminal activity such as theft or selling drugs. We could also use the example of a woman who is in fear of her current partner, as this person rapes her and physically abuses her and the kids. This mother in desperation would most likely also end up involved in criminal activity, killing the man who is always hurting her and her children. These two scenarios of course would result in both victims ending up in jail and serving a possible life in prison. In these two cases capital punishment wouldn't be a good choice as it wont seek the greatest good. Why? The law would need to understand the circumstance of the actions, the government could probably invest into programs to help fathers in this situation find a job to sustain their family, and they could invest in better protection programs for women that are abused. It would not prove to kill them for what they have done, as their intention was a means to survive and to hurt the community clearly demonstrating the principle of utility. In the case of Terese Lewis, age 41, maliciously planned a scheme to gain $250,000 in life insurance from her husband, hiring two men to murder both husband and stepson while she stood in the kitchen to watch in their home in Virginia. Capital punishment, which was