Capital Punishment

6 Pages 1563 Words

Capital Punishment

In the United States, the use of the death penalty has always been, and continues to be a controversial issue. Every election year, politicians, wishing to appeal to the moral sentiments of voters, routinely compete with each other as to who will be toughest in extending the death penalty to those people who have been convicted of first-degree murder. Both proponents and opponents of capital punishment present compelling arguments to support their claims. Often their arguments are made on different interpretations of what is moral in a just society.
Proponents of capital punishment persuasively argue that a “central principle of a just society is that every person has an equal right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” (Cauthen, 1). Within this principle, the deliberate (premeditated) murder of an individual is viewed as a heinous act, which prevents the person from realizing his or her right to pursue happiness. They strongly feel that persons convicted of first-degree murder must, themselves, pay the ultimate price. They claim that the death penalty must be imposed in order to maintain the moral standards of the community (Cauthen, 1). Proponents of capital punishment are aware that many people who oppose the death penalty are fearful that innocent people may be wrongfully executed.
They insist, however, that numerous “safeguards” are built into the criminal justice system which insures the protection of those facing capital punishment. Among the safeguards are: 1. Capital punishment may be imposed only for a crime for which the death penalty is prescribe by law at the time of its commission. 2. Persons below eighteen years of age, pregnant women, new mothers or persons who have become insane shall not be sentenced to death. 3. Capital punishment may be imposed only when guilt is determined by clear and convincing evidence leaving no room for an alternative explanation of the facts. 4...