Wednesday, March 4, 2015

Thiel College-The Death Penalty

Thiel College-Comment Project No. 4

Hugo Bedau  claims: 
"The execution of the innocent believed guilty is a miscarriage of justice that must be opposed whenever detected.
Most human activities like medicine, manufacturing, automobile, and air traffic, sports, not to mention wars and revolutions, cause the death of innocent bystanders.  Nevertheless, advantages outweigh the disadvantages, human activities including the penal system with all its punishments are morally justified."
Do you agree or disagree with this statement?  Provide a detailed explanation of your position.

23 comments:

Anonymous said...

Student #18

I agree with this statement completely. Sure, there are many deaths that are caused by all of these incidences but taking a life on purpose is exactly what it is. If you are killing someone on purpose, you should be punished for the act that you have committed. Killing someone on purpose is not defending your country, it's not accidentally getting into a car accident or overdosing on drugs. The penal system is morally justified while these other things are not.

Anonymous said...

Student #25
I agree because you get what you deserve if you do the crime then expect the punishment. Also, if you take act in driving a car or flying in a plane, and more so participating in a war the result of death will increase exponentially. If you take a life in war you are considered justified if you take a life in criminal ways then the penal system is morally justified in taking full act of the law.

Anonymous said...

Student No. 21

I do agree with this statement. Killing another human is morally wrong and should be punishable by the penal system. I believe plane crash, war, etc. doesn't even compare to a heartless murder. War is a part of today's life, and I believe is completely justified for whatever happens. Unjustified Murders are punishable by the penal system, while these other acts are not.

Anonymous said...

Student no. 9

I agree and disagree with this statement. I do believe that if someone intentionally kills someone, they deserve punishment, but I do not think it is right to kill an innocent person. I understand that the system doesn't require absolute certainty, but I believe that if you're going to accuse someone of murder, you should have some extremely strong evidence to prove it is them.
I think it is difficult to compare this to innocent bystanders in car accidents, sports, air traffic, etc. because these are usually accidents. I do not believe you can compare an accidental murder to an intentional murder.

Anonymous said...

Student No. 15
I do not agree with this statement. I do not agree with this statement because it is essentially saying that it is okay to execute an innocent person just because the system believes they did. I would rather let hundreds of criminals free than to execute an innocent person. I do not think the death penalty can compare to any of these examples. Some of what is listed above are accidents, plenty of innocent people die everyday from accidents Yes it is sad that innocent people die from wars and etc but no one is purposely trying to kill them. Murdering someone and getting executed for it is no accident. I agree that if you kill some one on purpose you deserve a punishment, but the statement above is saying its okay to execute an innocent person because the systems believes they are, which is wrong on so many levels.

Anonymous said...

Student No. 28

When it comes this statement I feel as if it goes both ways, as in I agree on some aspects but disagree on others. A person who killed someone deserves immediate punishment whatever the punishment may be through the penal system. However, it is not right that although there may be benefits that innocent people are put to death. For a murder case the accusers must have the utter most certainty that the suspect is the guilty and committed the crime. The human activities that Bedau talked about the can cause innocent deaths are accidents and unfortunately things like that happen but it was not intentional.

Anonymous said...

Student No. 3

I could go both ways with this statement. I agree and disagree because on one hand i believe that a person who commits a crime worthy of the death penalty deserves to be punished and should be punished through the penal system. On the other hand it isn't right that to punish innocent people. Certain crimes are accidents that kill innocent people, but that does not mean that those people should be punished. Unfortunate things happen, but it is not always on purpose.

Anonymous said...

Student #26
I agree that if someone murder's another person then they deserve the death penalty. I do not agree with killing an innocent person because they may think he or she's guilty. That's not right. Obviously when someone gets in a car, airplane, go for a walk, any of those there is a chance of dying but those are considered accidents and killing an innocent person is not right, This is how the death penalty becomes arbitrary.

Anonymous said...

Student #2
Given this statement, I agree and disagree with Bedau. In the situation of a planned premeditated murder the death penalty should be applied because there you are meaning to hurt someone and you should do justice. But of course you always have to take into account of the mitigating factors.
On the other hand, if the person is innocent the death penalty should not be applied. If there is unclear evidence then that evidence should be looked at closer and studied more instead of saying they are guilty to solve the case. Yes, it is great to finally find justice for the victim and the victim's family but make sure that you are giving justice to the right person and not someone who has not committed the crime.

Anonymous said...

Student No. 6
I disagree with this statement. It is true that innocent bystanders die every day from natural causes and everyday occurrences throughout life. However, if we as a society can prevent innocent people from the penal system, then why not eliminate it? The Death Penalty has good intentions, yet we should prevent innocent people from death. For example, we can penalize them to life in prison, and if for some reason they are found to be innocent, a life was saved.

Anonymous said...

Student No. 23

I agree with the statement that the killing of the innocent is a miscarriage of justice. I think that we do our best to determine the guilty from the innocent. I think it could be the courts fault of why innocent people are put to death. There should be zero doubt in the minds of the court that the person committed the crime, because the killing the innocent is completely wrong.

Anonymous said...

student no.22
While I believe that the killing of an innocent is wrong, the institution of the death penalty is vital to prevent the killing of innocents by setting a deterent example. If criminals believe that there are no consequences for their actions, more innocent lives will be lost on a grander scale. I believe that our system of protections in regards to the Death Penalty are sufficient to ensure that there are no innocents executed unjustly.

Anonymous said...

Student #7
Comparing someone innocent dying in war to someone innocent being executed is absolutely ridiculous. Someone innocent dying in war is someone understanding the risks on their life when trying to do this good, as well as the other examples. When someone innocent is executed it is the biggest kind of injustice imaginable. By not executing anyone there would be no chance of executing someone innocent. Also by only executing volunteers that also eliminates the possibility of an innocent person losing their life. Killing someone who was falsely convicted is the biggest form of injustice and wrong doing that can be done to someone.

Anonymous said...

Student #14,
I agree that if someone has committed a crime that is punishable by death. Innocent people do die everyday. Even in the crimes punishable by death people that are innocent are killed. In most cases there are that are innocent that are killed so there are both parts of the argument in the case. People that are killed do to false judgment should not be killed but the people that end up being killed do no deserve these.

Student #27 said...

#27
I agree with the statement that many innocent people die every day from disasters such as plane crashes and medical malpractice. But, comparing them to someone who we intentionally kill is ludicrous.
When we kill someone on death row who may be innocent is a good reason to sit back and look at our system. What is sad is that we have most likely killed plenty of innocent people.

Anonymous said...

Student 24:
I do not agree whole-heartedly with Bedau’s statement, however, he does bring up a good point. I agree that the advantages have to outweigh the disadvantages, in order to continue the action. I believe that in order for one of the examples he uses to continue to happen, the deaths of the innocent bystanders has to help the greater good of everyone else. If the bystanders don’t give up their lives, a lot of other people might die in a much more severe way.

Law and Justice Policy said...

END

Anonymous said...

Student No. 17

I am unsure of how I feel exactly about Bedau's statement. It is indeed a miscarriage of justice when an innocent man is executed for crimes he did not commit, but I do not believe that the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages. Killing is wrong no matter the reason behind it. Comparing a war or a revolution to the death penalty is like comparing apples to oranges (as cliche as that is). The death penalty will not save millions or protect millions from harm, whereas war and bombings can. I do not agree with war, but it at least has logic behind it.

Anonymous said...

Student No. 1
Hugo Bedau claims:
"The execution of the innocent believed guilty is a miscarriage of justice that must be opposed whenever detected.
Most human activities like medicine, manufacturing, automobile, and air traffic, sports, not to mention wars and revolutions, cause the death of innocent bystanders. Nevertheless, advantages outweigh the disadvantages, human activities including the penal system with all its punishments are morally justified."

I agree with the statement, it is a complete miscarriage of justice. I understand that there are injustices with war and that innocent people do get killed, but with war the fairness and exhaustiveness of the justice system is not a factor. Whenever one goes through the justice system there is a protection and a promise that justice will be served and those who are guilty will be proven guilty. In a criminal trial the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt, it someone is innocent then there is no way they could be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The problem comes in confessions and the police putting people in the position that they would rather die or go to jail than stick up for themselves. This is why I think cases like Miranda are so important; people need to be protected from the police. I also understand that in war, medicine, manufacturing, sports and others there is a no strict guarantee of “no harm” like the guarantee that is carried in the justice system. I would say that even though the advantages outweigh the disadvantages we must continue to work for a more perfect justice system. I think that if all of the laws were followed and the police and the people did what they were supposed to do and spoke truthfully that the justice system would be nearly perfect. It is up to society to correct the problem with the justice system and miscarriages of justice. If it is such an issue to the people concerned with injustices it starts with one person to change, to be different, to make justice a perfect formula.

Anonymous said...

Student #5
I believe the exact opposite of Hugo because I believe that everyone has their time to die. It doesn't matter how, it just matters when. In human life we have a start and a finish. If they are not guilty that is the fault of the justice system. Innocent people die all the time it is just a way of life. therefore, why argue the justice aspect when the prosecuted is already dead. Just send some money to the family and say sorry. They will move on from the situation at hand. This is really the biggest downfall of the death penalty so, let them live in jail instead of dying for being wrongfully convicted.

Anonymous said...

Student #10
I agree with Bedau's claim. The penal system does make some mistakes in accusing innocent people but it also has a high rate of accusing the right people. Some innocent people will suffer but it is for the greater good. We as humans take risks everyday that could end in death, but many of us don't, the same can be applied to the penal system. Its simply wrong time wrong place in my opinion and that happens sometimes, but if it can be avoided i'm all for it.

Anonymous said...

Student #19

I agree with the statement because killing another human is wrong and should be justified by the penal system. If someone takes away someone's life on purpose than that life should be justified. Their is a huge difference between killing in a war, and murdering outside of war. In war you are expected to do you job and protect your country. If you have to take a life it is for a reason. Outside of war their is no reason to take someone's life on purpose. Although the wrong person gets the death penalty sometimes, it is very unlikely to happen often. The death penalty needs to stay around to scare people from murdering other.

Anonymous said...

Student no. 12

Bedau's claim seems somewhat contradictory to me; I agree that executing an innocent person is the biggest miscarriage of the criminal justice system, but I disagree that the penal system is always justified, even when it involves a wrongful conviction. In terms of justice, I believe it is better to let the guilty go free than it is to execute the innocent. A wrongful execution simply leads to another victim; the guilty person is still free. While people participate in things that could kill them every day, they do so with the understanding that they are risking their lives. The justice system wrongfully executing people is something that we are supposed to be completely protected against by the constitution.

Post a Comment