What is the PURPOSE of the death penalty?

reallypablo

In general, there are four theories concerning criminal sentences: retribution, deterrence, incapacitation (separating the offender from society to prevent him/her from repeating the offense), and rehabilitation.

According to the Supreme Court, capital punishment has two purposes: deterrence and retribution. That means one purpose is to prevent people from committing capital crimes because if they know they might be put to death they are less likely to commit those crimes. It also means that people who actually do commit these crimes must be told how unacceptable their actions were, and therefore must be punished to the fullest extent possible under the Constitution, which is the death penalty. Note that the Court did NOT state that a recognized purpose of the death penalty is to cut down on repeat offenders (some people think of capital punishment as the ultimate form of incapacitation; the Supreme Court evidently does not agree that capital punishment should be used in this manner). It also did not mention a cost/benefit analysis concerning the cost of keeping prisoners in prison for life. Courts deal with justice, not accounting.

In Atkins v. Virginia, the Court also said that neither of these goals are fulfilled when a mentally retarded person is put to death, and therefore executing a mentally retarded person violates the 8th Amendment as being cruel and unusual punishment. A mentally retarded person would not understand that committing the crime might result in being put to death, so there is no deterrent effect, and a mentally retarded person couldn't form the necessary culpable state of mind deserving the death penalty, so it doesn't really act as retribution.

As for how the death penalty came about, you would need to read some scholarly articles on the subject as it is probably older than human history.

David C

People who can never return to society such as mass murderers deserve it and would be less of a burden if simply put down.

Dana B

"*some want it because it costs nearly 20k$ a year to keep a prisoner alive, why keep mass murderers or child rapists alive and pay for them to live and eat good meals and watch tv and work out in prison"

Actually, given how much the state spends on the appeals process which the prisoner is entitled to exhaust before being executed, it costs more to execute a prisoner than it does to simply keep one in prison for life.

The main purpose is generally felt to be as a deterrent...people are supposedly less likely to commit murder if they know they could face the death penalty if caught and convicted.

jerimiah

Read it, all your answers are here. but unfortunately since the subject is ultimately one of opinion that's what you'll get.
The Laws:
The US Supreme Court stated that Capital Punishment serves two purposes; Retribution (a misinterpretation of the biblical adage an eye for an eye...) and Deterrence (a dead man can not re-offend). Both are however limited views that are defended by their proponents for various political expediencies. Retribution is nether spiritual nor biblical the adage an "Eye for eye and a tooth for tooth, were meant to set limits, ie. no more than an eye for an eye or a tooth for tooth. Gandhi, demonstrated this concept during the great tribulation in India, when reported asked by a Hindu, what to do about having killed a muslim and left his child fatherless? Gandhi replied that he must take the child and raise it as his own. An eye (a father) for an eye (a father), Retribution is in an of itself a means to creating nothing but more retribution. It is legally, and morally a corrupt concept. But those who support the act of retribution seem to simply do it on an emotional basis. They do not seem interested in moral or social norms, they are not to be argued with on the basis of preventing crime or malfeasance. they just want REVENGE, and out of sympathy for their loss we as a
a society grant them revenge. It is supposed to end the "sense" of suffering of the victims. Today only Capital crimes, Treason, Murder, et al, are punishable by death.
The Truth:
It is ironic that people like this will espouse a biblical passage like eye for an eye, but ignore others like he who lives by the sword?.... also the fact remains, "laws are fallible (Benjamin Franklin) because man is fallible", and history also shows us that the; affluent, influential, articulate, and attractive, will in most cases never see the death penalty, inspite the width and depth of the impact of their capital crimes, Pol Pot (the leader of a nation) killed millions, yet never faced more than condemning words. Kill one, it makes you a murderer, make a product that kills millions (knowingly) and you will receive a fine (gotta keep those political contributions rolling in?) Be white and female and attractive (never see the full measure of the law) be a man of color (they hang you from the nearest tree).
The Origins:
Who knows? maybe caveman Grog saw Caveman Kung steal his fruit and clubbed him over the head? The other clan members saw it and adopted the same idea of justice through retribution. The earliest known codification of law know to have an actual Death Penalty is the Code of Hammurabi.
Now as for laws:
The justification are ever changing but the argument used is universally, (as it is for any law) based on politically motivated activities aimed at satisfying social concerns. The rights of individuals to defend themselves, seems to cycle into the collective right of society, and ultimately into the exclusive rights the state. each Social Epoch, pastoral, communal, the various state based civilizations(Babylon, Greece, Rome, etc) the feudal systems, right up to modern societies have cycled through the same way: individual rights, collective rights, exclusive rights. We once had the right to defend ourselves against both personal attacks and collective (governmental) oppression, we then cycled on to collective acts (Trials before actions?) and now are faced with a policing agent sanctioned by the governing body, as the only means available to defend ourselves, otherwise you are a "vigilante". As for current (US) history, the death penalty has been both abolished and then reestablished several times, (look up the "Furman" decision) this will give you an idea of how difficult it is to actually justify state executions.

thomas f

Cuts down on repeat offenders. Why go through the expence of holding people sentenced to life in prision. People in the past were much more straightforward and had more common sense.

gigreg13f

Different reasons for people wanting it:

*some say an eye for an eye, if you kill someone you should be killed
*some want it because it costs nearly 20k$ a year to keep a prisoner alive, why keep mass murderers or child rapists alive and pay for them to live and eat good meals and watch tv and work out in prison

there are other reasons but these are 2 big ones.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: