Anda di halaman 1dari 3

Ziyan Momin

Period 2
Thesis: The death penalty is a necessary punishment that is the best form
of justice for the victims of capital offenses.
Outline:
I.

II.

III.

The death penalty is a fitting form of retribution for the victims and
their families.
A. The death penalty is the only punishment that fits the gravity
of the crime (Pojman)
1. Death penalty helps ensure that the perpetrator be
given the correct punishment.
2. This is a fitting punishment because humans fear death
more than loss of liberty.
B. The death penalty will help ensure safety for the rest of
society (Andre and Velasquez)
1. Perpetrator will be dead or awaiting death hence
reducing him committing other crimes toward the rest
of the society.
2. Capital punishment helps protect the public by ridding
the world of the culprits of capital offenses.
The death penalty has a lot of benefits for society
A. The death penalty restores the balance of justice in society
(Bidziszewski)
1. The death penalty restores the order in society by
punishing the perpetrator the equal amount to the harm
hes caused
2. The crime caused by the perpetrator causes unbalance
and punishing the culprit with capital punishment is the
only way you can regain balance.
B. The death penalty helps reduce crime (Tanner)
1. Reduces chance of repeat offense since perpetrator has
no chance of getting out since theyre on death row or
already dead.
2. Theres a strong correlation in a reduction in murders
after the implementation of the death penalty
Refutation: The death penalty cant guarantee justice
A. The death penalty cant guarantee someones guilt
(Pilkington)
1. You can never be sure if someone is the actual
perpetrator so its unwise to kill them.
2. Many innocent people have been killed by the death
penalty
B. Killing the perpetrator wont change the crime that was
committed.
1. An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind

2. The death penalty could prolong the suffering for the


victims family
Conclusion:
A. The death penalty should be treated as a necessary
punishment for capital offenses because its a fitting
form of retribution, it helps ensure safety for the rest of
society, it helps balance justice in society and because
it helps reduce crime.
Summary:
Pojman: Louis Pojman, PhD, a philosopher and professor, in an essay
entitled, Why the Death Penalty is Morally Permissible writes that
retribution isnt the same as revenge and that retribution is only the
rationally supported theory that the criminal deserves a punishment fitting
the gravity of his crime. Pojman also writes about how danger arises when
society doesnt punish criminals in a way thought to be proportionate to the
gravity of the crime.
Andre and Velasquez: Claire Andre and Manuel Velasquez both write about
how capital punishment has an obligation to protect the safety and welfare
of its citizens and that murderers are a threat to that welfare and safety for
the general public hence putting the murderers to death can ensure that
killers dont kill again. The two also write about how capital punishment
brings about the greatest balance of good over evil and society should
support that.
Bidziszewski: J. Bidziszewski, PhD, and Professor of Government and
Philosophy at UT Austin, wrote in an article entitled, Capital Punishment:
The Case for Justice that society is orderly when each and every person
receives what is due to them and that crime disturbs that order. He continues
and says that deserved punishment protects society by restoring that order,
making the person who does wrong pay a price thats equal to the harm that
he/she has done. Bidziszewski also says that retribution answers injury with
injury for public good and thats what makes it different from revenge.
Tanner: Robert Tanner writes in his article entitled, Studies Say Death
Penalty Deters Crime, that in a series of academic studies over the last halfa-dozen years that the answer to the question on whether or not the death
penalty acts as a deterrent to murder or not is yes. The academic studies
that Tanner cites counted between 3 and 18 lives that wouldve been saved
by the execution of each convicted killer. Tanner also quotes Naci Mocan, an
economics professor, where he says that the conclusion reached by science
is that there is a deterrent effect.
Pilkington: In an article entitled, US death row study: 4% of defendants
sentenced to die are innocent, Pilkington writes about how even if its only

4% there are being innocent people being sentenced to death when they are
in fact innocent. Pilkington writes about experts from Michigan and
Pennsylvania and how many of the team of them estimated that many of
the more than 8,000 men and women who have been put on death row since
the 1970s were falsely convicted.

Works Cited
Andre, Claire, and Manuel Velasquez. "Capital Punishment: Our Duty or Our
Doom?" N.p., n.d.
Web. 21 Mar. 2016.
Budziszewsk, J. "Capital Punishment: The Case for Justice." N.p., n.d. Web. 21
Mar. 2016.
Pilkington, Ed. "US Death Row Study: 4% of Defendants Sentenced to Die Are
Innocent." TheGuardian. Guardian News and Media, 28 Apr. 2014. Web.
21 Mar. 2016.
Pojman, Louis P. "Louis P. Pojman, PhD - Death Penalty." N.p., n.d. Web. 21
Mar. 2016.
Tanner, Robert. "Studies Say Death Penalty Deters Crime." Washington Post.
The Washington
Post, 11 June 2007. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.