|LC Classifications||KF26 .J8 1978b|
|The Physical Object|
|Pagination||iv, 419 p. :|
|Number of Pages||419|
|LC Control Number||78602843|
to establish rational criteria for the imposition of capital punishment - hearings before the senate committee on the judiciary, s , 95th congress, 2nd session, ap ncj number author: anon publication date: abstract: Objections to S. A Bill to Establish Rational Criteria for the Imposition of Capital Punishment Charles L. Black, Jr Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. To establish rational criteria for the imposition of capital punishment: hearings before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Ninety-fifth Congress, second session, on S. , April 27 and By United States. imposition of a moratorium, de facto or de jure, or through narrowing the basis for imposition of the death penalty (restricting the category of offences or offenders). The diverse range of speakers identified how these advances were made, and how societal and File Size: 1MB.
I believe the primary rationale for capital punishment is that of justice - fairness. Notions of deterrence or incapacitation are secondary to the fundamental notion that murder is wrong, and that capital crimes should default to capital punishmen. Killing of any kind requires a very high bar of justification. We, therefore, place the burden of evidence on capital punishment's proponents, not on those who wish to stop it. Without a strong enough rational case, the decision defaults to the abolishment of the death penalty. [In May , Professor Black submitted to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary a statement of his views on S. , the bill to establish criteria for the death penalty under federal law. This article is substantially Black's statement to the Senate committee, with the addition of footnotes as necessary or as may be useful to the reader.—Ed.]. Chapter – 4 established by law2, it can be argued that sentence of death in the present form violates the citizen's right to life. Further Art. 14 of Constitution declares "equality before law and equal protection of the laws", which means that no person shall be.
Law as Punishment / Law as Regulation. Austin Sarat, Lawrence Douglas and Martha Merrill Umphrey, editors Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, p. Reviewer: Ana Aliverti | May This book is a collection of essays examining the relationship between regulation and punishment from different perspectives. Virtue Ethics and Criminal Punishment. One of the central problems in the criminal law is that the imposition of punishment cannot be. certain states with capital punishment statutes do. Capital Punishment. I. The Big Picture: Can We Ever Justly Impose the Death Penalty? A. Introduction. 1. Default punishment for major crimes in early US history. Not until mid 19th century that we had a penitentiary system. Then started to make distinctions between degrees of murder. PA started this. Difference was one type was eligible for cap. tions of capital punishment, this paper has implications for broader debates in the philosophy of punishment. However, my primary goal is exegetical. Kant s justi cation is not obvious; its main points are not explicitly defended, and some of what Kant does say about capital punishment is vulnerable to overly simplistic by: 1.