The death penalty is one of the most polarizing concepts of criminal justice. Some factions within the legal fraternity consider it to be inhumane and ineffective as a punishment. However, by considering Jeremy Bentham's philosophy that the ultimate measure or morality is providing the greatest happiness to as many people as possible, then the death penalty is an effective sanction for crimes. Examining a past death conviction, alongside the various purposes of punishment, yields an objective argument for capital punishment.
Timothy McVeigh was an American terrorist who executed a bombing in Oklahoma City in 1995. He drove and detonated an explosive-laded truck near the Alfred P. Murrah Federal building, resulting in 168 deaths and several hundred injuries (Cooper, 2020). Additionally, the bomb killed children in a daycare facility in the building. The loss of lives, especially the children’s, created a public outcry. Eventually, the state of Indiana executed McVeigh by lethal injection in 2001.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
McVeigh's case exemplifies the role of capital punishment in maintaining a sense of right and wrong in society. One of the primary purposes of punishment is retribution. The classical retributionist theory states that one who commits a wrong must receive a penalty equal to their transgression. As such, since McVeigh killed people, it is only befitting for him to die too. The modern interpretation of retribution focuses on "on the present, on the victims and their satisfaction” (Maculan & Gil, 2020). Here, the justification of the death penalty is for the victims to provide closure to the victims. Closure is essential since it prevents victims from retaliating against the original offender, and probably harming other innocent people. The victims' relatives and the general public experience some gratification after the offender's execution. Therefore, by inflicting equal harm to murderers and providing closure to the victim's relatives, capital punishment affords happiness to a larger section of the society.
Generally, punishment also serves as a deterrence for future crimes. Deterrence seeks to “dissuade others from offending in the future” (Drumbl, 2020). Executing death penalties makes people avert from committing a similar crime. McVeigh was a domestic terrorist who aimed at hurting fellow Americans. The fact that he chose not to die in the bombing implies that he sought to preserve his life. His execution served warned other people who may wish to express their grievances in a similar way that they will not escape the ultimate punishment. Therefore, the death penalty prevents a surge in criminal activities that cause harm to people. Fewer on no murders in a society means that most people are often happy as they do not deal with an avoidable loss of their loved ones. Thus, capital punishment aligns with Bentham's interpretation of morality.
Finally, capital punishment incapacitates offenders. The concept of incapacitation aims at preventing “future crime by physically moving criminals away from society” (Point Park University, 2020). Therefore, for serial murderers and terrorists, the death penalty is an appropriate punishment to protect the public from a crime's recurrence. While some people argue that it is wrong to punish people for crimes they may commit in the future, the risk is not worthwhile. For instance, a terrorist like McVeigh might still wish to harm more Americans and attack other inmates and prison wardens. Incapacitation eliminates the threat of a similar attack from the same perpetrators, thereby easing the fears of the larger section of the public.
While capital punishment is contentious, there are valid objective justifications for its execution. McVeigh's case demonstrates how the death penalty aligns with the core purposes of punishment in criminal justice. It also highlights how Bentham's philosophy of right and wrong serves society. Consequently, the death penalty remains a morally acceptable form of punishment.
References
Cooper, K. L. (2020). Oklahoma City bombing: The day domestic terror shook America. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51735115
Drumbl, M. A. (2020). We're Exhausting Ourselves, Let's Get Busy Instead. In F. Jessberger & J. Geneuss (Eds), Why Punish Perpetrators of Mass Atrocities? Purposes of Punishment in International Criminal Law (pp 196-212). Cambridge University Press.
Maculan, E., & Gil, A. G. (2020). The Rationale and Purposes of Criminal Law and Punishment in Transitional Contexts. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies , 40(1), 132–157. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqz033
Point Park University. (2020). Addressing Transgressions: Types of Criminal Punishment. Retrieved from https://online.pointpark.edu/criminal-justice/types-of-criminal-punishment/
