0
The debate over capital punishment involves a range of stakeholders, including legal scholars, ethicists, human rights advocates, and policymakers. Opponents argue that it is inhumane due to the potential for wrongful executions, the psychological impact on those involved in the process, and concerns about the methods used. Proponents, including some law enforcement officials and victims' rights advocates, may argue that it serves as a deterrent to crime and delivers justice for victims. The discussion often reflects broader societal values regarding justice, morality, and human rights.
What else can I help you with?
If you are with capital punishment what are some good questions you could ask your opponent in a debate?
yes
Who were the people involved in the conscription debate and why?
The people that were involved in the conscription debate were the parents of the boys because they didn't agree. :)
How do you get your girlfriend ungrounded?
Text her mom and debate about her punishment and see what you can do. -experienced Teen.
Who meets in the capital building in DC?
The senates meet in the capital building to debate laws.
What crime would you have to do to get death penalty?
Except for extreme cases such as treason, we no longer use capital punishment for crimes other than homicide. We used to execute people for rape, but this is no longer the case. If you want to find out more you can read up on the Capital Punishment Debate on Wikipedia. There are references to other really good articles that go into great detail, look for scholars such as Louis Pojman or Hugo Bedau.
In the book the bet what is being discussed at the party?
In the book "The Bet" by Anton Chekhov, the discussion at the party revolves around a debate on whether capital punishment or imprisonment for life is the more humane form of punishment. The banker argues that death is a preferable punishment, while the lawyer believes life imprisonment is more humane.
What is The history on capital punishment?
Capital punishment's history in the United States is basically a debate between two ways of viewing the world: that state-sanctioned death is necessary for society, and that a civilized society should not see death as the only fair way to punish any crime or criminal. Throughout the history of capital punishment in the United States, reformists have spoken out against capital punishment, changing the methods used to execute convicted criminals, reducing the types of crimes that deserve a death sentenced, in many cases, eliminating them and analyzing the forces that produce criminals to try to stop criminals from being created. As society continually struggles to balance the human desires for retribution and compassion, many different forces and opinions shape the continually evolving philosophy and practice of capital punishment.Short Answer: Historically - Capital Punishment (the death penalty) has been with the human race since the dawn of mankind and has existed in all cultures, in all nations, and among all peoples since that time.
What two men were in the great debate?
Daniel Webster and Henry Clay were the two men involved in the "Great Debate."
Who was involved in the debate over the compromise of 1850?
James Madison
Why was the death penalty suspended?
In the U.S. it was suspended in 1972 because of the case Furman v Georgia. The Supreme Court found it to be unconstitutional for a number of reasons including racial bias and that it was cruel and unusual. For more information go to Capital Punishment Debate on Wikipedia.
What is retributive justice?
Retribution is basically the principle of an eye for an eye. According to Ernest Van De Haag it is the paramount reason we should punish. The difference between revenge and retribution is that revenge is emotional, personal, and there is no upper limit (punishment is never enough). On the other hand retribution is rational, delivered by the state, and is just deserts. Try to take a look at the capital punishment debate article on wikipedia. There is a section on retribution that could help you out.
Why doesn't Starbucks want to be involved in the gun debate?
Starbucks is not a political organization, it is a chain of coffee shops. The gun debate is not relevant to coffee.
