Ernest Van Den Haag Death Penalty

1467 Words6 Pages
The Death Penalty Reviewed Matthew Christiani 5-22-12 Phil-05 In the debate over capital punishment, the opponents argue that the death penalty should be legalized because; it is by implementation, that we have been able to decrease the murder rate in society by placing such a high penalty on murder. On the other side of the debate, the supporters argue that capital punishment should not be legalized because it promotes the injustice in which it is intended to prevent. In this paper, I will argue that the stronger of the two arguments is to do away with the death penalty. In the article titled “The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense”, Ernest Van Den Haag concludes that the death penalty is moral and should be legalized because it deters…show more content…
According to him, 99% would rather be imprisoned for life than sentenced to the death penalty. Sir James Fitzjames Stephen, as cited in Haags argument says, "Some men, probably, abstain from murder because they fear that if they committed murder they would be hanged. Hundreds of thousands abstain from it because they regard it with horror. One great reason why they regard it with horror is that murderers are hanged”. In the article titled “The Folly of Capital Punishment”, Jeffrey Reinam concludes that capital punishment is immoral to our society; and thus, should not be legalized. Reinam reasons the death penalty is unjust, inhuman, and goes against the progress of civilization. Reinam’s primary argument and rebuttal to Ernest Van Den Haags deterrence argument, is that the death penalty goes against the advancement of civilization. Reinam explains that throughout history we take steps to "lower tolerance for one's own pain and that suffered by others". Due to the states high visibility, size, and moral authority, it is capable to have an impact on citizens beyond the immediate act it authorizes. Reinam says, “Reduction in the horrible things we do to our fellows, when those things are not necessary to our protection, is an advance in civilization.” Punishments become milder as societies become more advanced. The refusal to execute teaches about the wrongfulness of murder.…show more content…
Police chiefs surveyed nationwide have come to the same conclusion. They declared that the most ways to reduce violent crimes is to increase the number of police officers on the street, reduce drug abuse, and create a better economy with more jobs. Lastly, the ACLU and police officers alike believe the death penalty is a waste of taxpayers’ money and does not even deter violent crime. The FBI has found that the states using the death penalty have the highest murder

More about Ernest Van Den Haag Death Penalty

Open Document