• Home Page
  • What Do Murderers Deserve By David Gelernter Analysis

What Do Murderers Deserve By David Gelernter Analysis

Improved Essays
Show More
In “What Do Murderers Deserve”, David Gelernter’s essay, the main topic is capital punishment. Everyone has an opinion on capital punishment. It is a very controversial topic and whether you agree with it or not, is completely up to you. In “What Do Murderers Deserve”, Gelernter chooses to agree with capital punishment. The article starts out with Gelernter providing two examples. A Texas woman, Karla Tucker, murdered two people, expressed regret and remorse about her wrongdoing in prison, and was put to death. However, Theodore Kaczynski murdered three people and did not repent. He plead guilty and was not executed. When a murder takes place in a community, the community is split up. Gelernter wishes when a murder happens that …show more content…
This is a form of incapacitation. A good example would be a robber put in prison is no longer able to rob anymore. Similarly, murderers are killed to prevent them from murdering again, either in prison or in society, if they get out. Both act as a deterrent and as permanent incapacitation. Deterrence claims that capital punishment helps prevent future crime. Proportional retributivism, as we discussed in class, requires that punishment must be proportional to crimes. Society is expected to give its most terrible crimes its most terrible punishments. Reiman believes that execution is extremely similar to torture. Killing defenseless human beings enacts the defeat of that person. Although execution may be physically painless, it causes an intense and severe psychological pain. He also believes that we, as a society, should place capital punishment in the same category as torture: things that we should never do to human beings, even when they deserve them, because how horrible they are. Reiman believes that punishing a murderer with life in prison, instead of with death penalty as the lex talionis would demand, would meet the necessary conditions he specifies for an acceptable and just alternative …show more content…
The punishment should be based upon some form of equivalence. In this case, lex talionis demands that a murderer must receive the death penalty. The murderer took someone’s life, therefore his or her life must be taken away as well. Nevertheless, there is no way we can measure how much harm has been done. Lex talionis could be partially impractical and inadequate in this situation. For example, if a person murders a hundred people, there technically is no justice in the form of punishment available that will be proportional and can equate to the amount of damage done by the

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Analysis: How Liberals Cheat In The War Of Ideas
    • 578 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Analysis: How Liberals Cheat In The War Of Ideas

    Jonah Goldberg is the editor of National Review Online and author of The Tyranny of Clichés: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas. He takes the standpoint in favor of the death penalty and that those who oppose it, whatever the intention, cannot hold against the argument. A minor point of his would be that opponents tend to avoid cases where the audience would not sympathize with their argument. After reading his article “Why Death Penalty Opponents Can’t Win,” I agree with his opinion because it deters crime, there are cases where uncertainty is not an issue, and it is just to execute a criminal who deserves to be executed. It is difficult to defend politically the death penalty in a country where thirty-one out of fifty states favor it.…

    • 578 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Analysis Of Nathanson's Argument Against Capital Punishment
    • 1008 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Analysis Of Nathanson's Argument Against Capital Punishment

    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
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Cruel And Unusual By Thomas Long Summary
    • 415 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Cruel And Unusual By Thomas Long Summary

    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
    Read More
  • Superior Essays

    Death Penalty Vs Edward Koch Essay
    • 1640 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Death Penalty Vs Edward Koch Essay

    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
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    The Argument Of Jeffery Reiman's View On The Death Penalty
    • 1193 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The Argument Of Jeffery Reiman's View On The Death Penalty

    Today I am going to go into the argument of Jeffery Reiman and his view on the death penalty. Then I’ll give an objection from Louis Pojman’s side and then my thoughts on what Reiman’s rebuttal would be. After that I will decide whether or not Reiman has a strong argument. In this paper I’m not looking at the end argument, but what the author gives as evidence. To start off I will look at Reiman’s argument.…

    • 1193 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Superior Essays

    Igor Primoratz Death Penalty Analysis
    • 1621 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Igor Primoratz Death Penalty Analysis

    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
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    The Death Penalty In Just Mercy By Bryan Stevenson
    • 701 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The Death Penalty In Just Mercy By Bryan Stevenson

    Death Penalty The Death penalty is a highly controversial topic in present day politics. The public is concerned with how America’s most dangerous criminals are held responsible for their crimes as well as how they will be kept from harming others. It’s reasonable to want a mass murderer to be punished in a manner that removes further threat, but is it our place to decide if his or her life should be ended? In other words, is it moral for society to prescribe murder as retribution for murder?…

    • 701 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Capital Punishment In Truman Capote's In Cold Blood
    • 515 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Capital Punishment In Truman Capote's In Cold Blood

    Death is permanent, which creates a large issue out of capital punishment. Taking a life is wrong, hence the severe punishment instated. However, the penalty is the same as the crime. Two wrongs don’t make a right. A poor example is set by killing in response to killing, and the crime is perpetuated.…

    • 515 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Superior Essays

    Jeffrey Reiman Retribution Theory Summary
    • 1458 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Jeffrey Reiman Retribution Theory Summary

    (1350)Against the Death Penalty: An Analysis of Reiman’s “Moderate” Retribution Theory This argument against the death penalty will examine the “moderate retribution theory of Jeffrey Reiman. In this theory, the premise of retribution for murder defines the validation of the death penalty, yet not in the abuse of justice found in the American criminal justice system. Reiman believes that the death penalty should be abolished because criminals are not always cognitively aware of the crimes that they commit, which demands the rehabilitation of the individual. Reiman argues against the death penalty because it offers an extreme form of punishment for crimes that are rarely “conscious” in the mind of the criminal.…

    • 1458 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Analysis Of An Eye For An Eye By Stephen Nathanson
    • 1234 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Analysis Of An Eye For An Eye By Stephen Nathanson

    Nathanson believes the death penalty is completely justified, but in most cases it could be unjustified in practice. Legal judiciaries that impose the death penalty are not the ones leading to the execution of innocent humans. Nathanson also suggested the death penalty is inconsistent with the value of justice in society specifically. Nathanson’s argument is inconsistent with the value of justice, because the death penalty was imposed due to the extent of the specific crimes committed. Frankly in practice, actual death sentences are the result of…

    • 1234 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Making A Murderer Analysis
    • 1373 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Making A Murderer Analysis

    Judicial murder made by inequity legal system In the month after “Making a Murderer” premiered on Netflix, more than 129,000 Americans signed a petition to pardon Avery and Dassey for their convictions to the murder of Halbach and in the book ‘in cold blood’ written by Truman Capote, the two murderers were treated by ignoring the mental problem influence of theirs, they stayed in prison for five years and were finally performed death penalty. After reading the book and watching the TV show, I think these crimes sufficiently prove that there is a fundamental inequity at work in countless branches of legal system. Making a Murderer tells a story about the life of Steven Avery, who was convicted of rape in 1985 and imprisoned for 18 years, despite…

    • 1373 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Superior Essays

    Ernest Van Den Haag Capital Punishment Analysis
    • 1410 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Ernest Van Den Haag Capital Punishment Analysis

    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
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Ernest Van Den Haag Death Penalty Analysis
    • 1032 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Ernest Van Den Haag Death Penalty Analysis

    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
    Read More
  • Superior Essays

    Capital Punishment: An Act Of Justice Or Revenge?
    • 1554 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Capital Punishment: An Act Of Justice Or Revenge?

    Capital Punishment: an Act of Justice or Revenge? To many, executing the offender of a heinous and violent murder is seen as an act of justice and retribution, and is an essential aspect of maintaining moral balance, however, perhaps the stronger and more substantial position is that the death penalty is a barbarous act of revenge, motivated by emotion rather than logic. According to the “Retributive Justice Theory” those who break the law deserve to suffer punishment, and likewise, deserve to be punished in proportion to the crime committed.…

    • 1554 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Ethical Issues In Capital Punishment Debate
    • 783 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Ethical Issues In Capital Punishment Debate

    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
    Read More

Related Topics

Ready To Get Started?
Discover
Company
Follow
©2024 Cram.com
Privacy Policy |  Cookie Policy |  About Ads |  Site Map |  Advertise  | 
  • Cookie Settings