Death Penalty Essay
In this essay, the argument articulated by Ernest Van Den Haag in his article “The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense” will be analysed and evaluated. His points will be criticized and weighed, section by section and his views will be summarised and prosecuted. Viewpoints proposed by other theorists such as Glover (1977) and Reiman (1985) will be presented to aid in the critique of the position espoused by Van Den Haag. Arguments will be offered to support the views that his argument is deeply flawed.
In his article, Van Den Haag states his case for the death penalty and defends various criticisms of it. He believes that discrimination in distribution of the death penalty and execution of the innocent are irrelevant to whether or not capital punishment should be abolished. (Shaw 1993) He trusts in the deterrent effect of the death penalty and he also maintains that it is an appropriate method of retribution. Van Den Haag also, does not believe that the Death penalty is excessive or degrading, but just. (Shaw 1993)
Firstly Van Den Haag explains how he understands that the death penalty is unevenly distributed among convicts but he believes that if capital punishment is unjust and immoral then no correct distribution of it could make it right. That it’s not the punishment that is wrong it’s the use of it, he argues that it is similar for any other punishment, or reward, even. That just because one guilty person escape the punishment doesn’t mean others deserve to. This argument is severely flawed. If you follow the data of the victims of execution, you will find that the mentally ill, the poor and people belonging to minorities form a large chunk of the total number (Buzzle 2011). These people are discriminated against and have full reason to feel hard done by because we are all ‘equal’. If the majority of convicts being executed are black, for example, then if a black man is put on death row he has full reason to believe that the deciding factor for his execution
In his article, Van Den Haag states his case for the death penalty and defends various criticisms of it. He believes that discrimination in distribution of the death penalty and execution of the innocent are irrelevant to whether or not capital punishment should be abolished. (Shaw 1993) He trusts in the deterrent effect of the death penalty and he also maintains that it is an appropriate method of retribution. Van Den Haag also, does not believe that the Death penalty is excessive or degrading, but just. (Shaw 1993)
Firstly Van Den Haag explains how he understands that the death penalty is unevenly distributed among convicts but he believes that if capital punishment is unjust and immoral then no correct distribution of it could make it right. That it’s not the punishment that is wrong it’s the use of it, he argues that it is similar for any other punishment, or reward, even. That just because one guilty person escape the punishment doesn’t mean others deserve to. This argument is severely flawed. If you follow the data of the victims of execution, you will find that the mentally ill, the poor and people belonging to minorities form a large chunk of the total number (Buzzle 2011). These people are discriminated against and have full reason to feel hard done by because we are all ‘equal’. If the majority of convicts being executed are black, for example, then if a black man is put on death row he has full reason to believe that the deciding factor for his execution