Analysis of Persuasive Arguments on Death Penalty and Crime

This essay explores the multifaceted arguments surrounding the death penalty, focusing on the concepts of crime and punishment. It begins by examining the justifications for capital punishment, including retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, and incapacitation. The essay then delves into the arguments for and against retribution, analyzing how the guilty deserve to be punished and the role of justice. It explores the role of public execution and the historical shift in the view of capital punishment. The essay also addresses the arguments against retribution, such as the moral dubiousness of capital punishment and the potential for discriminatory application, while acknowledging the suffering of those on death row. The essay concludes by considering the arguments that the death penalty is not a deterrent and highlights the debate about morality and the direct effect on criminal behavior, and the need to appeal death sentences.

There are many arguments both for and against the death penalty. Which arguments do you find most
persuasive? Why?

The arguments made on crime and punishment are most persuasive as there are capital
punishments which needs to be distinguished completely from the other extrajudicial executions
which needs to be carried out. The crime and punishment broaches the idea that killing might
never be justified. The conscience is something which inhibits one from killing or imposing a toll
on those who tend to transgress the costs for the lethal violence. It then outweighs the societal
gain as well (Chen & Tsai, 2015). The justifications for the punishment also include the
retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation and incapacitation (Simon, 2017). The public execution is
also considered one of the forms of capital punishment where the members of the public might
be voluntarily attending, and exclude the presence of a small witness that is for assuring
accountability. The social hisotirians note the beginning in 20th century in US, and Europe for the
death which has become shielded from the view of public, and is occuring more over the time.
The crimes that are against the humanity are usually punishable by death in countries that retain
the capital punishment. There are intentional homicide which is seen to be punishable by death in
different countries, thereby, retaining capital punishment, with involvement of aggravating
factors that are needed by statute. The crimes are also punishable by death in certain countries
which include terrorism, espionage against the state, political protests and economic crimes.
The favorable arguments in context to crime and punishment include retribution which is
about how the guilty people deserve to be punished. The argument states about the justice which
is needed for the people to suffer from wrong things. The criminal should also get punishment,
depending upon the severity of crime which could ultimately lead to death. There are many
people who think about the measures to prevent the people from committing any offence with re-
offending and preventing them to contemplate the offence.

The arguments against the retribution could be the capital punishment which is called as
vengeance rather than the retribution like the morally dubious concept. (Simon, 2017) Here, the
anticipatory suffering of the criminals is seen and kept on death row for a long time which makes
the punishment more severe. There are some criminologists who argue on the increase in
sentences that are made for the crime and that can cause the investigators of crime to give a
higher chance to find the criminal (Lacey & Soskice, 2015).
In many countries, the death sentences are not carried immediately after being imposed,
and there is a long period of uncertainty for all the convicted while their cases are appealed. The
capital punishment is seen to have a longer engendered which considers the debate about the
morality and the direct effect on the criminal behavior. There are arguments which are made
where the supporters believe that the people who commit murder are forfeited with their own
right to life. The capital punishment with retribution, expressing and reinforcement which
includes how the violation is condemning the person’s right to life (Campbell, Vogel &
Williams, 2015). The supporters also claim that it has a unique potent of the deterrent effects on
the potentially violent offenders for whom the threat for the imprisonment is not a major
restraint. There are certain opponents who feel that the research is demonstrated about the death
penalty which is not effectively deterrent than the other alternative sanctions of life which are
made for the long-term imprisonment. Some disputes can be easily administered with justice.
Here, the opponents also need to maintain the applications for the capital punishment to show
and highlight about the attempts which are made to single out the different kinds of crime with
deserving of death which will be completely inevitable and discriminatory (Mika & Zehr, 2017).
Finally, the argument is about how one is able to appeal the death sentences which are protracted

and then those which are condemned to death. They are often seen to be cruelly forced by the
people to be endured for a longer time of uncertainty, when it is about their fate.
References
Campbell, M. C., Vogel, M., & Williams, J. (2015). Historical contingencies and the evolving
importance of race, violent crime, and region in explaining mass incarceration in the
United States. Criminology, 53(2), 180-203.
Chen, C. M., & Tsai, T. H. (2015). Crime and Punishment in T aiwan (Republic of C hina). The
Encyclopedia of Crime and Punishment, 1-5.
Lacey, N., & Soskice, D. (2015). Crime, punishment and segregation in the United States: The
paradox of local democracy. Punishment & Society, 17(4), 454-481.
Mika, H., & Zehr, H. (2017). Fundamental concepts of restorative justice. In Restorative Justice (pp.
73-81). Routledge.
Simon, J. (2017). Governing through crime. In Law and Poverty (pp. 97-115). Routledge.