The death penalty as a means for punishing capital offenders has continuously elicited mixed views regarding its ethical implications. Supporters of the death penalty feel that it is the best way to get rid of vicious offenders who cause much pain to their victims and their families. On the other hand, opponents of the death penalty assert that it is inhumane and barbaric when one considered the execution methods. These opponents feel that it is high time governments did away with the death penalty and instead found a more inhumane punitive and rehabilitative techniques. In as much as individuals think that the death penalty is not punitive or rehabilitative enough, it is apparent that it is an effective deterrence. In this case, then governments should not relent from executing vicious individuals who have no regard for other people’s lives, and governments In solving this debate it is essential to approach it from an ethical perspective by applying various ethical theories. Utilitarianism can be used to support the death penalty as it focuses on the majority in determining the rightness or the wrongness of an action.
Utilitarianism, as a widely applied and popular ethical theory, was proposed by John Stuart Mill to establish morality. The theory rides on the assumption that the morality of an action can be determined by focusing on its net benefits. According to this theory, ethical action is the one that is capable of maximizing happiness for most of the people (Oduodom, Bassey, Okpe, and Adie, 2019). In this case, then, individuals must engage in actions that are associated with more benefits as opposed to consequences, or the activities will be unethical. Utilitarianism asserts that individuals should pursue activities that advance the happiness of the majority and avoid those that deter happiness. The theory can be applied to the issue of the death penalty considering that it is associated with positive and negative outcomes.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The death penalty serves a utilitarian purpose as it is considered a significant deterrence to crime to others who would consider engaging in criminal activities. The criminal justice system attaches severe punishments to capital offenses, which helps individuals to see that the consequences of engaging in crime outweigh the benefits. When one individual is executed for committing vicious crimes, other members of the society are likely to stay away from evil for fear of being executed (Lantin, 2017). The availability of the death penalty as a severe punitive strategy will deter people who are otherwise not scared by other punishments such as long or life prison terms. From a utilitarian perspective, the death penalty by playing a deterrence role is ethical as it contributes to overall happiness (Mann, 2015). Societies are no longer worried about criminals and crime, which gives them peace of mind allowing them to thrive. Once a capital offender has been executed, the society is assured that the individual is incapacitated and will never bother them.
The death penalty serves another utilitarian objective as the execution of offenders brings a sense of justice to more individuals. Vicious and violent offenders who hijack airplanes, commit murder or engage in espionage cause emotional distress to lot more individuals. Their actions hurt the victims, friends, relatives and the larger society as the weight of their actions become realistic (Oduodo et al., 2019). This kind of suffering can only be reduced if the criminal justice system executes the offenders as doing this is considered equivalent to the crimes they have committed. Seeing the offender being executed will surely give the victims, families, friends, and the public a lot more satisfaction. According to Sethuraju, Sole, and Oliver (2016), the offenders must suffer the same pain and suffering or more than their victims for justice to prevail and for the victims to be satisfied. A lesser punishment such as prison term would mean that the victims would spend a significant part of their time attending parole hearings, which only makes them bitter. In this case, then capital offenders ought to receive the punishment that equals to the crime so that the majority can sense that justice has been served.
References
Lantin, R. G. (2017). The death penalty debate: A look at the main arguments. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science , 7(3), 43-47.
Mann, W. (2015).The death penalty debate: A critical examination of the moral justifications for capital punishment. HIM, 1990-2015 , 1722.
Oduodom, M., Bassey, S., Okpe, O., & Adie, T. (2019). Kantian and Utilitarian ethics on capital punishment. Budapest International Research and Critics Institute-Journal (BIRCI-Journal) , 2(2), 28-35.
Sethuraju, R., Sole, J., & Oliver, B. E. (2016). Understanding death penalty support and opposition among criminal justice and law enforcement students. SAGE Open, 6(1), 1-15
