Modern society strives to develop compassion and understanding and reduce cruelty, as the value of human life and individuality is steadily growing. The death penalty, commonly known as capital punishment, has always been a hot topic of controversy regarding the legal permissibility of punishment. In the United States, the death penalty can be imposed by either Congress or the state legislature for crimes considered “death crimes.” Nevertheless, the current justice system in the United States and the world as a whole is predominantly retributive in nature, viewing crime as a morally reprehensible act that must be compensated by proportionate punishment. “The United States has some foundation in parsimonious practices,” with an internal tendency to respect the constitutional rights and freedoms of the people and choose the most limited intrusion (Atkinson 7). Thus, it is difficult for an innocent and previously unconvicted person to receive capital punishment, given the degree of guilt and the many evidentiary instances it must go through.
The claim that restorative justice can be used in combination with other methods of administrative influence is generally valid. However, even if the principles of restorative justice are considered, the death penalty is the highest form of punishment, intended for cases where restoration is impossible. Most victims of violent crimes want the convicted person to be given capital punishment (Adinkrah and Clemens). In the situation of the loss of many lives, most people do not want to negotiate with the criminal, appeal to their conscience, and allow them to return to society, as this is potentially dangerous.
In addition to the above, the death penalty is an effective deterrent for serious crimes. The Death Penalty Information Center confirms a deterrent effect of it based on research (Death Penalty Information Center). The death penalty is ineffective against petty cases of ideological crimes, such as radical religious fundamentalists. Therefore, it is not used in such cases since the crime and punishment are disproportionate and hardly can be effective.
Many people make altruistic and humanistic arguments against the death penalty. One might argue that “even when the perpetrator is executed, it is not as though the pain of losing a loved one will suddenly dissipate” (The Crimson Editorial Board 5). This approach views existing justice from a restorative perspective, which is unconvincing because of its irrelevance. The private feelings of the victim or his relatives in grave crimes that threaten society and the social order cannot be a measure of responsibility. The author uses the logical error of the Straw Man, talking about the relief of pain, which is not the goal or goal of retributive justice, in which the death penalty is considered within the framework of the appropriateness of punishment and its deterrent capabilities. The evidence presented in the above claims supports this form of punishment because it views the measure as part of a larger existing structure rather than imposing abstract and irrelevant principles.
In conclusion, the death penalty is an effective deterrent and punishment when viewed within the framework of retributive justice and as part of the existing justice system. Regardless of the irrelevant claims of restorative justice, readers should consider the plausibility and compatibility of the death penalty under the principles of retributive justice. In addition, policies should reflect the realities of how the current US litigation functions. The claims made in this analysis are substantial because they seek to pragmatically reorient the points of debate toward what is practical and relevant. Many arguments against the death penalty seem to forget that the current justice system is not restorative, leaving them vulnerable to Straw Man’s logical fallacies.
Works Cited
Adinkrah, Mensah, and William M. Clemens. “To reinstate or to not reinstate? An exploratory study of student perspectives on the death penalty in Michigan.” International journal of offender therapy and comparative criminology 62.1 (2018): 229-252. Web.
Atkinson, Daryl V. “A Revolution of Values in the US Criminal Justice System.” Center for American Progress. Web.
“Death Penalty Information Center.” Deterrence, 2022. Web.
The Crimson Editorial Board. “The death penalty is wrong. Every single time.” The Harvard Crimson. Web.