Death Penalty as a Deterrent Willie Olds GEN 499: General Education Capstone
Instr. Heather Miller
November 3, 2012
Death Penalty as a Deterrent Persuasion is what makes the world go round. There are many reasons for persuasion as well as many topics that persuasion can be applied. The argument of Capital Punishment (which is currently what is “awarded” to individuals who have been found guilty of a “heinous crime.”) is a mindboggling social, psychological, and ethical topic that has plagued the United States, and the world, for many years. For this to change, the mindset of the United States needs to undergo a fundamental change from awarding the death penalty, to performing the punishment that was sentenced. This paper will discuss the fact that the death penalty, if used in a efficient, practical,
[no notes on this page]
Death Penalty and asset saving disposition to deter criminal activity, as opposed to being a punishment that causes more detriment to society than the criminals who are sentenced. 1
Before persuasion of the necessity of the death penalty can be discussed, it must be established exactly which type of crime deserves an “award” of capital punishment. “U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals defines "heinous crime" to mean murder, assault, kidnapping, arson, burglary, robbery, rape or other sexual offense. "Heinous criminal" means a person who has been convicted of a heinous crime or who has been found not responsible for the commission of such a crime by reason of mental disease or defect.” (ECLIPSE ENTERPRISES v GULOTTA) If an individual decides that doing wrong is the more applicable choice, they are, or at the very least, can be deemed immoral or unethical. If the intention of the deed is good then the deed is in and of itself good, thus ethical. “Kant says that these beliefs should be based upon principles, and not a deity.” (Johnson) Keeping this in mind, the intention of the deed, and not the “act” or the “how” persuasion is accomplished, but how the act of persuasion should be deemed ethical. Many companies have decided that they need to act in an ethical manner in order to glean the trust of its consumers, and society, its lawmakers, and law enforces should follow suit. “Ordinarily, highly credible sources are more persuasive than sources who appear less credible.” (Seiter & Gass) Companies know that their appearance to consumers is crucial, whether the intention is to be ethical because it is the right thing to do or because they are trying to appear ethical is a question for the philosophers. Society needs to recognize the importance of such an image. Anti-death penalty advocates main concern is with an individual that is innocent being executed. This is not as much a factor in today’s judicial system as it was, say, twenty years ago. The judicial system was originally set up to protect innocent people from having to suffer the tragedies of a horrible crime, to assign guilt, and to ensure the punishment fits the crime.
1. sentenced. Clear and effective introduction. [Heather Miller]
After a crime has been committed, a subject is apprehended based on preliminary evidence, then there is an evidence-gathering phase, a trial, and if necessary, a sentencing phase. This entire process is designed to work towards exonerating the innocent, to find the truth, carry out justice, and place blame where it belongs. The judicial system and its’ procedures are fluid and open to interpretation, constantly changing with the intelligence of man. While some of those processes may have changed over time, they always were and still are set forth with the intention of protecting the innocent. Once sentenced to the death penalty, the accused get many chances or opportunities to prove that they are innocent, introduce new evidence, or convince the courts that someone else is the guilty culprit Just the last two decades alone, much less in...