Of these side effects, the only relevant one is the idea that executions legitimize or endorse killing, sending the wrong message to society. On the limitations allegedly imposed by the lex talionis, see Reiman Justice, Civilization and the Death Penalty: Those who impose execution do not degrade those who are executed, for the guilty person volunteers for punishment: Give a quote from one of these paragraphs paragraphs 3, 4, or 5 that supports your answer to a.
There remain, however, two moral objections. Deterrence is not altogether decisive for me either. Van den Haag disputed claims that capital punishment is just a form of legal retribution by claiming that if laws are knowingly broken, legal order can only be maintained by enforcement.
Maldistribution of any punishment among those who deserves it is irrelevant to its justice or morality. Its is also the only fitting retribution for murder I can think of. His main argument in its defense stemmed from key themes such as deterrence, and punishment for severe criminals. United States, The ultimate punishment a defense by.
Does this view of punishment support capital punishment? While Van den Haag was still young, his family moved to Italy.
To let these others escape the deserved punishment does not do justice to them, or to society. Maldistribution -- this punishment is applied in an unfair way minorities and men receive it disproportionately Response: Hegel, have insisted that, when deserved, execution, far from degrading the executed convict, affirms his humanity by affirming his rationality and his responsibility for his actions.
In paragraph 11, van den Haag says, "the infliction of legal punishment on a guilty person cannot be unjust. Van den Haag responds generally with a statement that punishments are meant to be applied to an individual, regardless of his situation or race, because that person committed a crime.
What do you think? Punishment is to vindicate the law and the social order undermined by the crime. The second answer van den Haag gives in response to this argument is that the punishment itself is moral because the individual who has committed murder has proven himself unworthy of living in society.
He calls it a personal punishment. Explain what he means in terms of good and bad, or right and wrong. He does note that while discrimination may exist, two avenues still provide for the justice of capital punishment. We threaten punishments in order to deter crime.
Hundreds of thousands abstain from it because they regard it with horror. Van den Haag writes, "An infliction of a legal punishment on a guilty person cannot be unjust. One is that the Supreme Court exists to make these determinations at the highest level provided in this country.
This degradation is self-inflicted. But because no more than thirty murderers have been executed in any recent year, most convicts sentenced to death are likely to die of old age 1.
Unequal justice is the best we can do; it is still better than the injustice, equal or unequal, which occurs if, for the sake of equality, we deliberately allow some who could be punished to escape.
Van den Haag also believed that law breakers have more of an inclination to do it again. Van den Haag, in his book The Death Penalty: Over the years, Van den Haag took particular interest in the field of capital punishment and the death penalty.
What is "the only relevant question"? Does not life imprisonment violate human dignity more than execution, by keeping alive a prisoner deprived of all autonomy?
Temptation to commit a crime will be significantly decreased if the punishment for committing the crime is more severe. Furthermore, the punished person is aware of the penalty for his actions and thus volunteers to take the risk even of an unjust punishment.
We impose them not only to make the threats credible but also as retribution justice for the crimes that were not deterred.Homework on "The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense" by Ernest Van Den Haag You will probably have to read the entire paper before answering these questions.
What you turn in does not need to include the questions; just put the answers (and, of course, number them). THE ULTIMATE PUNISHMENT: A DEFENSE.
Ernest van den Haag. 1. In an average year about 20, homicides occur in the United States. Fewer than convicted murderers are sentenced to death. But because no more than thirty murderers have been executed in any recent year, most convicts sentenced to death are likely to die of old age (1).
THE ULTIMATE PUNISHMENT: A DEFENSE by Ernest van den Haag John M. Olin Professor of Jurisprudence and Public Policy, Fordham University.!
2! requirement of equality as much as is possible. Some inequality is indeed unavoidable as a practical matter in any system (7). But, ultra posse nemo obligatur. (Nobody is bound beyond ability)(8). Ernest van den Haag’s Concept of Justice Essay Sample In the essay, “The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense of Capital Punishment,” Ernest van den Haag relates the arguments of those opposed to the death penalty and then categorically refutes them.
Ernest van den Haag Young Bin Kim, Isabelle Kim, Minkyong Kim. Discussion Questions on Ernest van den Haag, "The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense" 1.
Why, according to van den Haag, is "maldistribution" of capital punishment irrelevant to the question of whether capital punishment is just or unjust?Download