Wednesday, February 20, 2019
Case Study: Murder by Two Colleges Students Essay
As an intellectual game, two male college students, ages 18 and 19, attempt to commit the absolute crime by kidnapping a young boy and de partding exchange from his p argonnts. They receive the ransom m unrivaledy but kill the boy some(prenominal)way. Later, they argon caught, tried and convicted of murder and kidnapping with intent to do bodily harm. Their vindication attorney, a brilliant lawyer, successfully argues against the destruction penalty and both workforce are sent to prison for livelihood. subsequently about five years, one of the men is killed in a fight, but the other completes his college education tour still in prison and teaches other convicts English. He also volunteers for medical checkup experiments, every last(predicate)owing himself to be injected with malaria germs in order to test new drugs. A prototype prisoner, he causes no trouble throughout his entire prison term. After about 30 years, he is paroled, whereupon he goes to a different commonweal th and continues to teach English. Two years later he dies of natural causes. Should this man have been subjected to upper fibre penalization? Why or why not Theories that will be applied1. Divine Command Theory2. meritoriousness Ethics3. UtilitarianismCapital penalization has been and will always be a widely debated topic. The biggest question that surrounds capital punishment would be is it chastely reclaim or is it mor altogethery wrong? in that location are many arguments for and against capital punishment. Is a capital punishment really a deterent as whatsoever would say? I will apply and test three theories to the reference mentioned above to see if capital punishment is the most appropriate root word or not. first-year I will examine the divine curb theory and see how it applies to the case mentioned above. In all fairness I must say that in the case mentioned above the divine control theory is strongly contradicting itself. How is that executable? Well let us depart by saying that the divine leave out theory uses Gods commandments to measure whether something is morally right or wrong. How is that contradicting? Speaking in the case of most major(ip) religions God asks us to punish those who commit intentional murder by death.At the same time God asks us to be for adult. plane with this major contradiction we rat safely say that the divine command theory would revoke the capitalpunishment in the case mentioned above. such(prenominal) a controversial conclusion smoke be easily proved. We croup also safely say that freeness exceeds punishment in the look of God. We all know that God is the most forgiving and the most merciful. How do we know that? Lets take any human being as an example. There is no doubt that there is no human being in the world without sin. If God really preferred to punish us preferably than forgive us for every sin we make because life would be a little different. Instead God waits for us and gives us a find oneself to repent so he can forgive us. Therefore in the case above it is clear for us all to see that the individual mentioned in the case above has committed to penance and most importantly he is not the same man who entered the firstborn time into prison.In conclusion the divine command theory would lead us to forgive the man and give him a chance later all that time he served in prison Now we bob up to the theory of virtue ethics. Without any argument or hesitation we can say that virtue ethics rejects capital punishment in all of its forms. Virtue ethics instead demands for a moderate solution. It considers capital punishment to be cruel and counter productive. Virtue ethics works towards making someone a better person and reinstate in them authentic and honorable virtues. How are you going to that if someone is dead? Some force say that there is a long time before a death sentence is carried out and there is enough time for that person to change and try to be a better person. Well that is decidedly not the case here. That is similar to saying to a student we are going to let you in to college but when you are done we are not going to give you a college degree.You are telling him that he can work hard but he cannot harvest his fruit. No Matter how good we may try to make it sound it is extremely unreasonable to expect someone who is sentenced to death to commit to change without giving them some sort of hope. On the other hand when there is a little hope, a little light at the end of the tunnel, then we can say that we have done our part in the eye of the virtue ethicist. Last but not least we come to utilitarianism. First we must understand utilitarians argue for the best possible emergence or the solution that would promote the great happiness and least suffering. In the scenario above utilitarians would also reject the death sentence. We can simply start off by asking how do two deaths or three deaths create more(prenominal) happiness? It is secure unreasonable. There are other ways of punishment one can use for the crime committed above other thancapital punishment that are greater promoters than the death sentence would ever be.To promote the greatest happiness in the scenario above is to give the inmate a chance to reform and repent and have a good influence or impact on society. In the balance that will always outweigh capital punishment. In my opinion, capital punishment is the best possible outcome for the scenario mentioned above. First let me start by saying that the punishment should break down the crime. The person mentioned above committed the most extreme crime cognise to man and therefore deserves a punishment equal in magnitude. randomness I will without hesitation state that everyone fears death. Being so the case then capital punishment would be the best deterrent and disturbance of crime man can employ. then(prenominal) I will go on to mention that by committing intentional murder one has steppe d alfresco the line that divides us from animals, there for no longer deserves to live among us. Then let us examine the case of the life sentence. It is very obvious that one who is sentenced to life in prison has nothing to loose and is more likely to commit more crimes even inside prison. Summarizing all this up I stand by position as being a advocate for capital punishment in the case mentioned above and any other there is to come.