The Death Penalty - Capital Punishment

The Death Penalty-Capital Punishment

Many different arguments exist in society today. There is abortion, health care, the war overseas, gay marriage, global warming and many others. One battle is that of capital punishment. Crime has always permeated life from various angles and will probably never cease to exist. Justice is served in different ways and the outcome has been different in many cases. The purpose of the law is to find punishment for the crimes committed and to make people responsible for their actions. Courts, society, religions, victims and their families have disputed these consequences for ages. Recently a Professional athlete was let out of prison for dog fighting and immediately re-entered sports, as if nothing happened. People were outraged and some just wanted their hero back. An average person in society may not have had the same fate. A man was put to death for crimes he committed as a youth. In prison, he had renounced his past life and committed himself to helping kids stay out of gangs.

The death penalty is the ultimate and most extreme punishment. Society and courts believe at times that the crime is so severe and there is no chance of rehabilitation for the offender. The only answer is the ending of one's life. I have looked over two sources. One is an excerpt from the second chapter of a book called: The Death Penalty-A Defense and the second an article: Legal Arguments Against the Death Penalty. Both writings look for justice and at the severity of crimes. Both sides try to provide the proper answer and justification to whether or not to take a person's life for the acts they have committed.

David Anderson, the author of the book that is for the death penalty is entirely bent on seeking justice for the victim. In the beginning, he states that "justice has, both as a word and as a conception, ended up in the shadows" (Anderson 1). He looks to the rights of the victim, not to those of the perpetrator. He says that "with human dignity we point the spotlight on the victims of the crimes" (Anderson 2). The author believes that the crime of murder should be answered with its equal-death. He writes that society has a responsibility to stand up for the victims and to speak for them. "The death penalty is the only punishment for violent criminals and murderers if justice will be administered" (Anderson 2). It seems that the answer to the death penalty is whether or not the law is willing to do the right thing. "We need to ask this questions: If we on the scale place the victims of the violent criminal and the murderer, what do we have to place on the other scale in order for it to be even and just" (Anderson 3). Anderson even goes on to ask the reader what they would want if they were the victim of murder. If there is no equality in crime and punishment then there is no justice. He says, "As long as a punishment bears no proportion to crime the justice is weak and deadly sick" (Anderson 5).

Professor David L. Gregory, the author of the argument against the death penalty thinks that with the power of God and rehabilitation (prison), no man is beyond being reformed. "Although there are many "legal arguments" against the death penalty, there is none so compelling as the transcendent principle that no one is beyond the redemptive, transformative power of God" (Gregory 1). Ultimately, the purpose of jail, probation,

...