U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Two Ideals and the Death Penalty

NCJ Number
198773
Journal
Criminal Justice Ethics Volume: 21 Issue: 2 Dated: Summer/Fall 2002 Pages: 27-35
Author(s)
Tom Sorell
Date Published
2002
Length
9 pages
Annotation
This article discusses and compares two views of the death penalty.
Abstract
The view of Kant was that not every civil state could rightfully take the life of those that commit murder because not every civil state recognizes the freedom, equality, and independence of citizens in the idealized civil state envisioned by Kant. The question is whether the death penalty can be justified in a properly constituted state even if most of the civil states in the world that apply the death penalty are guilty of injustice. Mill identified brutal murder without extenuating circumstances as uniquely deserving of the death penalty. He thought that the death penalty only seems to be very severe and that it is less severe than imprisonment with hard labor for life. The argument by Kant does not support the death penalty for even the worst crimes if it is unjustly legislated or unjustly administered. These arguments add weight to arguments against the death penalty. The more severe the penalty, the stronger the safeguards ought to be against its wrongful imposition. In addition to the just state, the ideal of responsible agency impinges on the death penalty. People are able to satisfy the ideal of responsible agency only if they rise above the threshold for being minimally responsible or if they rise above the threshold for being able to be held responsible. People that have psychotic episodes or are very young cannot be held responsible for what they do. Their failure to rise to the ideal of responsible agency may be more excusable than it is for others. The ideal of responsible agency governs not only the execution of intention, but also deliberation before and after the action. A willingness to take the consequences is necessary for full-blown responsible agency. The worldly ideal does not rule out the death penalty because even in an imperfect world it does not cancel out the force of the ideal of responsible agency. 9 notes