Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Cruel and Unusual Punishment
The eighth amendment states that, "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." But what exactly constitutes cruel and unusual punishment? Is capital punishment a form of cruel and unusual punishment? Are certain methods of killing criminals cruel and unusual (e.g., by firing squad, quartering, etc.)? What distinguishes the punishments that are cruel and unusual from those that are not?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
24 comments:
I think that anything that is drawn out over a period of time and meant to cause as much pain as possible before death would be considered cruel and unusual. As for the types of execution today, lethal injection, gas chamber, etc. shouldn't considered cruel and unusual because they really aren't meant to drag out the death and cause a lot suffering. They are meant to be quick and not cause much pain. So what distinguishes cruel and unusual punishments from punishments that aren't cruel and unusual, is whether or not the punishment is meant to bring suffering. All of the ways today in which we would perform and execution aren't meant to bring suffering to the criminal, simply death. With this I believe that capital isn't a form of cruel and unusual punishment.
I agree with Michael. When we talked about cruel and unusual punishment in class Jesse mentioned how "Toddlers and Tiaras" is cruel and unusual punishment to him. However, I think cruel and unusual punishment is PHYSICAL pain rather than mental or emotional. Any type of physical pain that is drawn on for an extended period of time is cruel and unusual. For example, the firing squad could be considered cruel and unusual punishment if the person did not die right away and had time to suffer. This is why many states use lethal injections as their form of capital punishment because it does not give the criminal time to suffer.. or so i thought until the presentation in class today.
Someone also brought up the fact that being in jail for life can be a form of cruel and unusual punishment. I agree that a lifetime in jail, for me, actually seems worse than the death penalty. However, as I said before, it is not a physical pain or torture that we are putting these people through. They knew the consequences for their actions and we are not inflicting extensive pain on them. So therefore I believe life in jail is perfectly acceptible.
I think any kind of death penalty is cruel and unusual. I think that they should put them in jail making plates or something and reform the ones that are willing to be reformed.
I have to disagree with Shenell. I think cruel and unusual punishment in its worst form can be mental or emotional. Take water boarding for example, in most places it is considered a extreme form of torture. Physically it is not that excruitating but the mental aspect makes your brain think you are drowming. Physical pain does not cover cruel and unusual punishment. I think the death penalty is a great tool in limited circumstances. For the people that are serial rapists and killers, having lethal injection is nothing compared to the pain they caused there victims. Cruel and unsual punishment I believe is torturing innocent people. If you did something wrong, you deserve to be punished. This is a very in depth issue and rehablitation vs punishment. However trying to stick to philosophy, it is immoral to deny a person their basic human rights unless they deserve to have them denied.
I do agree to a certain extent with the above comments but I must disagree with what Shannell said about only being physical pain. I am having a very hard time grasping just what "cruel and unusual punishment" should be defined as but I do know that I think mental and emotional trauma can be extremely awful. In some cases I feel that mental and emotional pain can be worse and more damaging than physical, in most cases your bruises will fade but a memory is not healed with time. I think the whole idea of capital punishment is just wrong. I don't see how it can be moral or considered the right thing to do. I feel that no one should be put to death unless he or she is being put to death for extreme medical purposes. I don't care about the whole argument on it being "justice" to kill someone who has killed other people. I really do not care I understand they did an awful thing but it is still not right by any means. Not only is capital punishment awful to the friends and family of the person but it is saying that sometimes it is okay and right to kill someone and I strongly believe that (other than medical purposes) it is not right at all.
Andrea Cunningham
I agree with the above comments. I think that Michael stated the right thing, it is about suffering and how long the person has to suffer. This can either be physical or emotional suffering both are horrible. Like we discussed in class some people who are sentenced to life in prison develop some sort of psychological disorder and that is just as bad if not worse then the lethal injection or any other form. When you develop a psychological disorder that stays with you for life and you have to suffer though that every day if you are going to get the death sentence it is not a lot of suffering. The ways that they do it have been looked over and they are not going to kill someone in a horrible way. Doctors have gone over the procedure many of times to make sure it was the quickest and less painful way. There are always those few cases where it doesn't go correctly but that is just the way science works. I personally think that cruel and unusual punishment has to do with the time of suffering.
If you look back through history (see the new book by Steven Pinker, "The Better Angels of our Nature: Why Violence has Declined," you will find that what is considered "UNUSUAL" punishment has varied considerably over time and place. Calling something "unusual" is clearly context dependent, and must be considered relative to culture, religion, political climate, etc. Pinker's point is that violence in war and forms of judicial punishment has become more humanistic over the centuries.
I believe that cruel and unusual punishment can only be defined when the situation is known. For example, if someone gets the death penalty from speeding on a highway this would not be moral. But if someone gets the death penalty for torturing innocent people then it would be moral to give the death penalty. So as I stated above if the situation is not known, then it cannot be shown to be cruel and unusual or not to be. So with the death penalty, the situation in which the event occurred is important, considering that cruel and unusual punishment is a consideration of the death penalty. So is the death penalty moral? I believe it is moral in the right circumstances. If the criminal is undoubtedly guilty of a crime worthy of the death penalty then it would be moral. But if there is insufficient evidence it would not be moral. The criminal cannot be accused because the situation is not known. I believe this is a huge problem with the death penalty now. Too many people who get the death penalty are innocent. If there is doubt in a person's guiltiness then the death penalty should not be used. But if the crime committed is definitely true and worthy of death then I believe the death penalty is moral.
Defining what is a cruel and unusual punishment is very difficult. For instance, some people might say that spanking your own child is cruel and unusual, but I think spanking is a great form of punishment at a young age. The big question is “How do we balance out the punishment to fit the crime?” In my opinion this seems a little impossible because everyone has such a different judgment on punishment and crime.
How do we solve this? We can’t just say all punishments are cruel and unusual. We need some form of punishment for the people who choose not to abide by our societies rules and laws. We can’t let criminals roam free. Although there are flaws within our justice system, I think we are not that bad considering we have a trial by jury. In some countries you are not able to argue your innocence.
How do we develop a punishment to the point were the criminal will learn from his/her mistakes? If putting them behind bars weren’t an option, what would we do? I do not even know the answer to this question. I really don’t even know where to begin to solve this problem.
I agree with most of the above comments. I think cruel and unusual punishment is defined as something that prolongs suffering (physically and mentally) as Mike said. I also think it is an action that stresses the body beyond its physical and mental capability. Not based on subjective information, but on objective scientific information.
It was mentioned in class and above in the comments that a prison sentence could be considered a type of cruel and unusual punishment. I will disagree with that statement. Although prison limits certain personal interactions, it does not take them away completely. Prisoners can see family who visit and they are also able to interact with other prisoners. Prisoners also are given food, clothes, and place to sleep/live. It may not be the best or finest buy they still have these basic necessities. In addition, how is the life of a prisoner any worse than a homeless person? Both have a crummy situation, but at least a prisoner is guaranteed that they will eat that day and have a warm place to sleep that night. That is not always the case for the homeless. Therefore prisons are not cruel and unusual.
I also will say that the death penalty is not cruel and unusual. Besides some very rare instances where something went wrong, it does not cause pain that the prisoner can feel. I think the issue with the death penalty is that there are some faults with the process of convicting those who receive it.
I agree very much so with Michael and Kelsey, as well. I believe cruel and unusual punishment is anything drawn out for an extended period of time for no logical reason that causes extreme amounts of pain. Let’s take the death penalty for example. From the physical aspect, I do not think cruel and unusual punishment applies. With the types of executions used today, such as the gas chamber and lethal injection, I don’t think executions should be considered immoral. These types of executions were designed to create the smallest amount of physical pain to the prisoner. What no one really touched on is the other aspects. With the mental and emotional aspect put into consideration, I can definitely see how people view the death penalty as unethical. When people are placed on death row, I can imagine that being very torturous to their mental and emotional status. Sometimes people can be on death row for over 20 years. Imagine just waiting in a jail cell, knowing that eventually you’re going to be put to death; it could be tomorrow, next month, next year, in a decade. I just feel that would drive someone insane. Yes, that person was put in prison and was given the death penalty due to their illegal actions, but I can definitely see people’s point of view where it is a cruel and unusual punishment. Also drawing from the same aspect, once someone is given the day they’ll be put to death could also be seen as cruel punishment. Let’s say a prisoner was told a week in advance that he or she was going to be put to death. For that week, I couldn’t imagine the emotional and mental torture happening within that person. I guess I don’t really know where I stand on the issue, because I’ve never evaluated different aspects, I just focused on the physicality of it.
I also agree that cruel and unusual punishment is something that is drawn out for a longer period of time than it needs to be whether its physically or mentally. I believe that if you a prisoner is given the death penalty, then don't let them sit in their jail cell for a long period of time, because that prisoner will go through a lot of mental suffering. If a prisoner is given the death penalty, then just kill them that day or next, don't let them sit there and think about it. I feel like that would be cruel to do and it's unusual to cause a person that much suffering.
I do think that it is hard to draw the lines from what cruel and unusual punishment is and which punishments are not cruel and unusual.
I think that the death penalty is wrong. I do agree that people should get what they deserve but no one deserves to have to die in pain and suffering. I don't think it is moral to weigh out lives. Meaning if a man kills a woman, then he should be killed. I do not think that is beneficial to society. When isn't the punishment cruel and unusual? Is it only cruel and unusual to execute the innocent.
I agree with many peoples comments. The death penalty is not just about physical suffering. I think the death penalty takes a toll on psychologically and emotionally. I think that the death penalty is immoral but since it will never go away, I think the justice system needs to improve so that innocent people and so many people do not suffer as much.
When it comes to the death penalty it is a very hard topic to sway everyone's opinion of whether the punishment is cruel and unusual or if it is morally permissable. I think that what many people may not be considering is there is a long list of requirement in determing if a person is even going to be tried for the death penalty. Yes, there are still innocent people being executed and I agree that is wrong but what about for all those people who are guitly and do deserve to be put to death based on the list of criteria set up for the death penalty. In class today we talked about how Kant would say that once you become a criminal you lose some of your moral rights and depending on the severity of the crime determines how much of those rights you lose. If a person pleas or has a trial and are determined to be eligible for the death penalty more than likely they deserve it. I think that it is a punishment that should be used sparinly but it is not cruel and unusual. I know it isn't always a pain free execution but that is not what cruel and unusual means. Now if we were taking people out and making them almost drown and then bringing them back to life and repeating the cyle over until they finally die that would be cruel and unusual. Our country has come a long way in the types of execution used and we have tried to eliminate the more "cruel" ways like hanging and such but if a person is executed by the law then it is not cruel or unusual.
Cruel and unusual punishment in the U.S. was a problem years ago but it is now a thing of the past. It is no longer an issue because we are more concerned these days with doing what is morally right. Back in the day, people of all races died cruelly, people with mental illnesses and being tortured for petty crimes. Now a days when people, for example, receive the death penalty it is for a severe reason and even then it is done in a more humane way.
One thing I have noticed about the term "cruel and unusual" is that it changes over time like fashion. 60years ago it was "in" to wear pin curls and hang someone or thing from the nearest tree for the most ridiculous infractions, i.e. race, intelligence, etc. Moving away from these cruel acts is good but... no punishment or lack of punishment for crime is just as wrong as too much. I think incarceration as well as death by lethal injection are both harsh or cruel and that is the POINT! Very rarely does anyone or anything learn a "lesson" in life without the negative consequences inflicting some sort of pain or discomfort. That is how we learn to STOP DOING BAD THINGS.
I don't know how the death penalty could be classified as cruel and unusual punishment. If somebody kills another person then they deserve to die immediately after conviction. As long as the method of killing them is quick and efficient such as firing squad, lethal injection, etc. Letting them stay alive for the rest of their life in prison is more cruel and unusual then death because they have no hope of ever getting out and will die miserable anyway.
I agree with Torrey--too many people are innocent and then the suffering is for the innocent family these days and therefore there wasn't any sort of 'justice' served but actually creates more people wanting retribution.
Sherry T
Either way they're going to die miserable. So I guess whatever is the quickest with least misery--should be accepted--but these days the appeals process is long and drawn out so that the unusualness and cruelty is still there for the ones who are left waiting. And there's also the innocent people thing to factor in as well and the unhappiness of the innocent and their families.
I dont consider the death penalty to be cruel and unusual punishment if the person being put to death commited a crime where other people suffered or died due to their actions. In a case where they commited a crime that did not harm any other individual, than yes, sentencing them to death would be immoral.How can lethel injection or a firing squad be considered cruel & unusual, when the person dies quickly and without suffering? They deserve to be punished if they made others die or suffer. What about the pain and suffering that they have caused their victims families? Should'nt that be considered? As for someone saying that it is cruel & unusual punishment to be imprisoned,that is definately wrong! Some prisoners live better than people who struggle to live their lives everyday. Atleast prisoners have a roof over their heads and food to eat. The only thing they are denied is their freedom. Which is justified by their actions.
I agree with Michael on the aspect that cruel and unusual punishment cannot apply if the person has caused someone else pain or suffering. I believe in an 'eye for an eye' and if people do something wrong they deserve to be punished. The act of what they did in the first place was immoral so therefore someone should have to suffer for what they did. I believe in the justice that should be brought to the families of whom which they hurt. Letting them rot away in jail could also be considered cruel and unusual, depending on who you talk to. I think that cruel and unusual punishment is if someone is being tortured, but being murdered by lethal injection is quick and supposed to be not painful.
Kelcey Schaum
I believe that capital punishment is indeed cruel, but not unusual since its been around for so long. I think that it is primitive because there can be more effective punishments to be dealt. It is cruel because they are ending someones life. I feel that prison isn't necessarily to punish these criminals but to separate them from society for protection.
I agree with what many had to say about what constitutes as being cruel and unusual punishment. If there is a lot of suffering for no reason then that punishment is cruel. If a person is sentacted to death, that is their punishment, to die. They were not sentance to go through suffering but to lose their life. This is what makes any excessive suffering cruel. When it comes to carrying out the the punishment of death it should be done in the most pain free way which should be lethal injection. I know that there are some mistakes that occur and it does not wind up being the pain free way but out of all the options, it is the best bet. If it is used then capital punishment cannot be considered to be a cruel and unusual punishment.
That is an interesting topic because there are many different ways in which capital punishment can be very brutal. Especially in the old ways in which they used to do it. I feel like we as a country are starting to get away from capital punishment, which I don’t know if that the is the right thing to do or not. However, I do think that firing squad for killing the person shouldn’t be done. With what I know about the topic I feel as though injecting the person with drugs to kill them is a best way to go about it because it is essentially painless and is by far the less brutal out of all the different ways.
Post a Comment