Throughout my previous blogs, I have tried to explore different perspectives on capital punishment and brought forward sociological, anthropological and psychological points of views on the effects of capital punishment. What this exploration has illustrated is the complexity of this subject and its ability to polarize at the societal and individual levels.
Anthropologically, cultural groups throughout history have used capital punishment to achieve justice in different ways. The Apaches used the death penalty as a last resort and as the ultimate means to re-establishing equilibrium to their community. The Aztecs used capital punishment routinely and believed death of the offenders would repay the offense – the Aztec kings frequently commanded executions as personal demonstration of their divine right to rule. The French revolutionaries used Madame La Guillotine as a symbol to rid itself of an old order and to pave the way for a new society. The Victorians truly believed that the death penalty and use of capital punishment achieved fairness to all parties and it was the only "just" way to maintain moral society. Lastly, contemporary Americans continue to believe in capital punishment as a way of achieving justice, with the reinstatement of the death penalty in a number of American states. However, Americans also harbour a deep ambivalence towards capital punishment – leading to the long-term incarceration of inmates sentenced to a “zombie-like” existence on death row. Inmates experience a death without its finality and certainty.
On a logical basis, can capital punishment be justified? James Grey, in his article, “Facing the Facts on Death Penalty" ("Facing the Facts on Death Penalty".California: Digital Commons at Loyola Law School,
-Reducing to zero the chances that the offender will return to society
-Closure for the victim’s families/friends
-Deterrence against future violations by other offenders
-This is the appropriate punishment for the offender of such a serious crime
-Rightful societal vengeance (an eye for an eye).
I also showed in my previous blog that the first four justifications do not necessarily hold. However, what of the issue of societal vengeance? Can the death of an individual for a convicted crime compensate for that offense? It has historically been used by different and varied cultural groups to re-establish order to their communities. But does capital punishment truly achieve “justice”? And how is “justice” defined? I believe the concept of “justice” has evolved significantly in our society and its evolution influences our views towards the death penalty. Victims’ families are now frequently speaking out publicly against the execution of the convicted perpetrators. They believe that even the death of the convicted would not help them come to terms with their tragic loss nor will the execution be appropriate tributes to their loved ones’ memory. As a society we appear to have evolved from the Aztecs, the French revolutionaries, and the Victorians. And yet the debate continues. As Joane Martel reflects in her article, “Remorse and the production of truth” (Punishment and Society. California: Sage Publications, 2010. Pg 43. Web) these ongoing debates on capital punishment demonstrate the “enigmatic symbiosis between law, punishment and society”. Because of the overwhelming presence of social media, this is an issue that will not die.
While it is difficult to conclude definitively if capital punishment does achieve justice, what I have argued is how this issue documents how concepts of “justice, morality and truth” are determined by changes in society and cultural groups: the death penalty is a sociological phenomenon.
Work Cited:
Gray, James. "Facing the Facts on Death Penalty".California: Digital Commons at
Martel, Joane. "Remorse and the production of truth", Punishment & Society. California : Sage Publications, 2010. Pg 413-437. Web.
No comments:
Post a Comment