The administration of death penalty to the worst clique of criminals has been widely debated. There exists different school of thoughts, understandings and conclusions on this crucial matter. Different states within the United States are holding varying positions and stands on the existence and practice of the death penalty. Scholars and researchers have in the past gained considerable interest towards this subject. Consequently, various research findings and conclusions have been reached at. The supporters and those against the death penalty have substantially researched on the whole subject in reaching their final conclusion. It is vital that the incorporation of research findings from the two different schools of thoughts be carried out in ensuring a better and informed perception and conclusion to a third non-partisan party.
Blecker (2010) largely and broadly criticizes the individuals opposing the inception and practice of the death penalty by the State. The article by Blecker broadly supports the practice of the death penalty. The article further criticizes the abolitionists’ stand on the issue, which includes the introduction of life without parole in replacing the death penalty to the most heinous criminals. The author believes that as presently conceived and practiced the inception of life without parole (LWOP) has no place in the criminal justice system worth its name. The author further relates this stand with the current milieu regarding punishment as reflected in the mission statements and professional practices of the Departments of Corrections. The author labels himself a retributivist who believes in rewarding of goodness and consequently punishing the wrong doers[ CITATION Rob10 \l 1033 ]. Therefore, the author argues that since individuals in death row inflicted pain on someone else, they deserve resentful and total punishment as well. This role is hence played well by the death penalty. The author finds LWOP as a less effective way of ensuring justice to the concerned victims has been served. Therefore, the author suggests another form of punishment- permanent punitive segregation (PPS). This form of punishment to capital offenders is a hybrid of LWOP but is severe in nature in numerous ways. The aim of the PPS is to ensure that life is unpleasant and painful each single day to the offenders.
The article on ‘Law and Human Behavior’ opposes the imposition of the death penalty to the capital offenders[ CITATION Dic03 \l 1033 ]. The research analysis and findings in regard to the death penalty situation discussed in the article were carried out in the Netherlands. The research focuses on the implications of the poll results within the Netherlands regarding the regular polls taken in the said country regarding the death penalty. The authors perceive the imposition of the death penalty as a harsh treatment and punishment to the concerned individuals. The authors believe that the supporters of the death penalty have either wrong intentions or are just misinformed on the whole subject. These groups of people include the political elite who may be using this as a ladder in reaching high political heights and also those directly affected by the actions of the offenders. The authors’ speculation leads to and end suggestion that apart from criminal justice related attitudes, the support of capital punishment should be explained in terms of political alienation.
It is evident that these two articles though different in the long run still share some vital points and considerations. For instance, the authors all agree that the capital offenders are individuals who deserve severe punishments. The fact that the level of offence of the capital offender is extremely high and inhuman to a large extend is a thought that is shared in both articles. However, the authors’ tend to differ in the application and administration of the punishment. The latter believes that killing the offenders in this case is an extreme sanction that holds various mischievous and hidden goals, especially politically. The first referenced article is one that fully accepts and campaigns the use of death penalty in the United States. The author here believes that the criminals deserve severe punishment which may include taking away of their lives, a crime they might have committed themselves. The author believes that the same pain should be inflicted to the capital offenders. The author further incorporates the eye for an eye teaching and concept that is in the bible.
A conclusion can be drawn from the research in the two articles. The article that supports the death penalty seems to be more in logic than the other one. This article clearly expresses and illustrates the importance of administration of death penalty in the criminal justice system. This practice is systematically justified. This is achieved especially with the introduction of the case studies of real criminal episodes in the past. The illustration of these cases makes the death penalty justifiable. Therefore, the effectiveness and importance of the death penalty in the United States cannot be overlooked. It is an act that should continue to be practiced in all states since it helps in keeping at bay potential criminals and equally punishes the existing ones.
Blecker, R. (2010). Less than We Might: Meditations on Life in Prison. Federal Sentencing
Reporter , 23
Hessing, D. J., Keijser, J. W., & Ellfers, H. (2003). Explaining Capital Punishment. law and
behaviour , 27 (6), 605-622.