The Psychology of the Murderer Argumentative Essay by Shaad

This essay argues that the death penalty is justified as the highest form of punishment and bases its argument on considerations of the psychology of the criminal. It first of all considers the counter argument, that the death penalty is unconstitutional, inhumane and does not represent a greater deterrence than life imprisonment. In this context, it discusses Bedau's Minimal Invasion Theory. It then considers recidivism and the burgeoning prison populations to show that life imprisonment is not a satisfactory solution. It then sets out to argue that the death penalty does indeed deter, emphasizing common sense and judging the psychology of the murderer. Appeal is made to the ethics of Kant and to the opinions of John Stuart Mill, Professor James Q. Wilson and Louis Pojman among others. The gist of this argument is that the would-be murderer does not appreciate the arguments of the abolitionists, and yet common sense dictates that they fear the death penalty. Finally, it is argued that the death penalty is only humane if carried out swiftly. It considers the fact that the torture inflicted on prisoners on death row is not part of the decreed sentence.