David Gelernter's Punishment And The Death Penalty

David Gelernter in his essay “Punishment and the Death Penalty” noted, “after all, we are divided and confused on the issue. The community at large is strongly in favor of capital punishment; the cultural elite is strongly against it” (as cited in Hinman, 2006, p. 149). With this in mind, any answer regarding sentence for Grady would be predetermined, and it would depend on the slice of society the respondent would represent. As for the David Gelernter himself, if he has become one of the jurors, he probably would be in the cohort that ask for extended sentence and oppose the capital punishment. But, on the other hand, David Gelernter was in fact the very victim in a tragic incident, that left him with damages to right hand and right eye (Jenkins
& Jr, 2011). For this reason, it probably makes him a strong proponent of the death sentence for Grady. In my opinion, it it very interesting to notice that, any discussion can be interpreted either way considering all the circumstances involved.
Jeffrey Reiman is a successful philosopher, who authored hudreds of articles, several books, one of which “The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison: Ideology, Class, and Criminal Justice” has had nine editions.
He currently serves as a professor at the prestigiuous American University (“Profile Jeffrey Reiman,” n.d.). In other words, he has no personal history of suffering of any sort like in case with David Gelernter. For him, in my opinion, it was important review of a topic that he can relate only from a purely theoretical perspective. In his article such position supported by not even one or two, but four
propositions.
I am not sure if Grady should spend the rest of his life in prison.
Once again, it all depends on the decision that the jury would make. The media is providing a plethora of tragic examples on the daily basis, and it is very sad that so many people lose their lives and become part of rather dark part of life. According to David Gelernter, “in executing murderers, we declare that deliberate murder is absolutely evil and absolutely intolerable” (as cited Hinman, 2006, p. 151). Surely, the outcome is evident for David Gelernter. He will probably would feel betrayed, if Grady receives clemency and life time in prison. The same way, he felt, when Theodore Kaczynski, was found guilty of his heinous crimes, but nevertheless was able to plea bargain and have not been executed (Hinman, 2006). As for Jefferey Reiman, it probably would be easier to discuss the details of the case for a prolonged period of time based on “that innocent are sometimes wrongly convicted and if theyreceive the death penalty there is no way to correct the wrong done to them” (as cited in Hinman, 2006, p. 153). This is probably the very understanble position of utilitarian, who attempt to find some use of bad situation. And in this case in order to produce “the greatest overall good consequences for everyone” Grady’s life should be spared and replaced with lifetime sentence (Hinman, 2006, p.
xvii).
When it comes to Grady being a graduate with honors from high school, it seems unrelated compared to the gravity of his transgression. It can relate though, to the importance of his rehabilitation if incarcerated. If to take the opinion of David Gelernter, then he probably would still insist on capital punishment citing that crime and education honors are two different things, and one does not exclude the other in such case. I am nonplussed by why David Gelernter’s article completely omits even the mentioning the academic achievements of his malefactor. Jefferey Reiman does not directly mentioning the relationship between the outcome for outlaw and his educational honors. But his approach can be explicated from his utilitarian approach, where he would might have noted, that it is another reason save Grady’s life and attempt to give him a chance for rehabilitation, while incarcerated.
As shown above, the outcome in Grady’s case to a large extent would depend on personal experiences of those who judges. In my opinion, the verdict can be swayed either way. I personally would rather stay away as much as possible from being put in such a position. I completely justify position the offense that David Gelernter took on the judicial system. But I also understand rationale behind Jefferey Reiman conclusion in such divisive topic, which was very well argued.