Conclusion

The death penalty and the morality around it has been debated since the first use of this punishment in the 16th century. Through the lens of Natural Law, Situation Ethics, Utilitarianism, Kantian Ethics and the Islamic View there is a disparity between whether capital punishment is ethical, however I think that it could be moral. Natural Law argues that the precepts are important in determining the morality of an action because it was set by God and further said that the death penalty contradicts the primary and therefore secondary precepts making it unethical. Kantian Ethics argued similarly that the maxim of the death penalty is just as bad as the maxim of the crime committed and because of its deontological view that action is immoral and there for the death penalty is not ethical. Utilitarianism argues that through the use of the hedonic calculus the death penalty is not ethical because it fails to reach a large amount of universal happiness and love. In contrast Situation ethics argues that the morality of the death penalty depends on the case and other specific information such as the crime, the person, the victim, the motive and other details, however on a whole agrees the death penalty is ethical. Similarly, Islam states that the death penalty is ethical, because the murder with the motive of justice is permitted, however this raises questions surround the motive of the crime. It is also encouraged to forgive and have mercy, and overall the death penalty is ethical, but not the most ethical approach . I believe that when a crime as terrible as murder, rape, genocide or other such offences have been committed the death penalty is the appropriate punishment in that situation. A potential problem which arises from sentencing someone with the death penalty is that possibility that they may be innocent. If the convicted person happens to be innocent then the act of capital punishment becomes just as bad as the action the person was wrongly convicted for, because you are taking an innocent life. Another thought is that, Person A had killed Person B purposefully because Person B committed a crime such as murder or rape or anything which would have given them the death penalty. In this situation Person A is just carrying out the death penalty however it is illegal, this raises the question of why killing someone is acceptable when someone from the government does it. This creates more moral and ethical problems surrounding the judicial and governmental systems. The death penalty applies to many crimes including murder, assassination, rape, treason, espionage, overthrowing the government, terrorism, genocide, war crimes and many others. I believe that the death penalty should not be sentenced for many of these crimes and the fact that someone has the power to decide what actions result in another human, being murdered is an ethical dilemma in itself and an abuse to human rights. I believe that the death penalty has too many flaws such as the question of whether the convicted person is innocent, whether murder on a whole is wrong and why someone is being murdered as a punishment for murder as well as the question of whether it is a suitable punishment for certain crimes. I agree with the initial concept of the death penalty however it is to situational and raises many other ethical questions to be acceptable. I do not think the death penalty is moral.