More handpicked essays just for you.
Weaknesses of legal positivism
Legal Positivism and the Natural Law
What do you understand by legal positivism and how does it differ from legal naturalism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Case Of The Shipwreck Sailors
Case:1
In the first case the judge would like to show the 3 men sympathy but he believes he isn’t above the law, he sentences the death penalty. The philosophical label of this judge is legal positivism. One thing that the judge says to back this up is “As much as I would personally wish that these men could return to their families and put this tragic event behind them, I cannot permit them to do so. I am not free to make the law”. This quote showed that this judge was a legal positivist because he says that he wants to show them sympathy and let them return to their families, but he is not free to make the law and he is not above the law. Another quote to back this up is “I have sworn an oath to apply the law that authorized legislators have enacted”. Similar to the last quote, the judge is showing that whether he wants to be sympathetic or not he cannot because he has sworn an oath to the law that he cannot break. One weakness of this theoretical approach is that it is very ruthless. These men did not have a choice, killing Ozzie was the only way for the men to
…show more content…
This sounds very bad but based on the circumstance they were in it doesn’t make sense to give these men the death penalty. The law is not a valid factor in this case because a circumstance like this was not even thought of when the rules were being made. Therefore the law should not even be considered.
I do not feel like these three men should be put to death because of what they have done and i cannot bring myself to doing so. They did what they needed to do to survive. The waited as long as they could and ended up doing what was necessary for the three of them to survive. Laws are made to make sure that there is peace in a society where there are a lot of people, but there were only 4 people on that boat. Therefore, I find these three men not guilty of any charges.
Case
The death penalty, a subject that is often the cause of major controversy, has become an integral part of the southern justice system in recent years. The supporters and opponents of this issue have heatedly debated each other about whether or not the death penalty should be allowed. They back their arguments with moral, logical, and ethical appeals, as seen in the essays by Ed Koch and David Bruck. Although both authors are on opposite sides of the issue, they use the same ideas to back up their argument, while ignoring others that they don’t have evidence for. Koch and Bruck’s use of moral, logical, and ethical persuasion enhance both of their arguments and place a certain importance on the issue of the death penalty, making the readers come to the realization that it is more than just life and death, or right and wrong; there are so many implications that make the issue much more 3-dimensional. In dealing with politics and controversial issues such as capital punishment.
Edward Koch, who was former mayor of New York, wrote an article about one of the most controversial talks called the death penalty. This controversial topic questions if it is right to execute a person for a crime committed or if it is wrong. He made the point that the death penalty is good, in order to conclude that murderers should be punish with this penalty. He was bias in most of the passage, yet he tried to acknowledge other people’s opinion. In this article, Koch gives his supports to the idea to convict a murderer with death penalty by using a tone of objectiveness, shooting for the individuals who opposes his position to be the audience, and have a written form of conviction for the audience.
In “The Death Penalty” (1985), David Bruck argues that the death penalty is injustice and that it is fury rather than justice that compels others to “demand that murderers be punished” by death. Bruck relies on varies cases of death row inmates to persuade the readers against capital punishment. His purpose is to persuade readers against the death penalty in order for them to realize that it is inhuman, irrational, and that “neither justice nor self-preservation demands that we kill men whom we have already imprisoned.” Bruck does not employ an array of devices but he does employ some such as juxtaposition, rhetorical questions, and appeals to strengthen his argument. He establishes an informal relationship with his audience of supporters of capital punishment such as Mayor Koch.
“ ….Judgments, right or wrong. This concern with concepts such as finality, jurisdiction, and the balance of powers may sound technical, lawyerly, and highly abstract. But so is the criminal justice system….Law must provide simple answers: innocence or guilt, freedom or imprisonment, life or death.” (Baude, 21).
These types of individuals are not warmly received in the prison. They would most likely start altercations or be the focus of attacks due to their high profile. Giving these people life sentence only continues to make them believe they are above everyone else.
Don’t get me wrong, if a person proven guilty of murder, especially as heinous as this crime was, they deserve the death penalty but only if there was “no shadow of a doubt” hard pieces of evidence, more real proof, not circumstantial evidence, are connecting that person to the crime.
This theory looks at how the sovereign and its officials created the law based on social norms and the institutions (Hart, 1958). However, hard cases such as this makes for bad law, which test the validity of the law at hand based on what the objective of the law was in the first place. The law should not be so easily dismissed just because it does not achieve justice in the most morally sound manner (Hart, 1958). Bentham and Austin understood that there are two errors in the way law is understood, what the law is and what the law should be (Hart, 1958). He knew that if law was to become what humans perceived the law ought to be, the law itself would be lost, but he also recognized that if the opposite was to occur where the law replaced morality, than any man would escape liability and there would be no retribution (Hart, 1958). This theory looks at the point of view of the dissenting judge, Justice Gray, which is that the law is what it is, even if it may conflict with morals. Austin stated that “The existence of law is one thing; its merit and demerit another. Whether it be or be not is one enquiry; whether it be or be not conformable to an assumed standard, is a different enquiry (Hart, 1958).” This case presents the same conflict that Bentham and Austin addressed, that the law based on the statute of the
Have you ever thought about if the person next to you is a killer or a rapist? If he is, what would you want from the government if he had killed someone you know? He should receive the death penalty! Murderers and rapists should be punished for the crimes they have committed and should pay the price for their wrongdoing. Having the death penalty in our society is humane; it helps the overcrowding problem and gives relief to the families of the victims, who had to go through an event such as murder.
Unfortunately, the Peterson's case is not unique. Their case is only an example of one of a million crimes that are committed daily in which the death penalty could be applicable to punish the perpetrators and therefore stop them before they attack, kill, rape, or rob another victim. However, not all of the murderers or serial killers are captured; and most of the time, it takes many years to get enough evidence to give closure to their innocent victims and their families.
...cent man, it has happened before and would happen again. In fact, it was a member of my family who had the unpleasant job of hanging an innocent man and finding out what he had done after. So spare a thought not just for the innocent deceased, but the guilty hangman who has to live with it as well. I also understand that there are cases where the penalty is given because we cant be seen to be slacking, like that of Derek Bentley and the film of Let Him Have It. Once again it was my family who had to live with that. So, spare a thought for what that man has to live with for the rest of his life. As I said, these thing are inevitably going to happen and many people will suffer. But even after seeing what it can cause with my own eyes to my own family, i still think it Is a risk worth taking for the better of our country. That is why I am in favour of capital Punishment.
"In 1991, a young mother was rendered helpless and made to watch as her baby was executed. The mother was then mutilated and killed. The killer should not lie in some prison with three meals a day, clean sheets, cable TV, family visits and endless appeals. For justice to prevail, some killers just need to die." (Macy). This poor mother watched her child get killed in front of her eyes only to get murdered afterwards and never received the proper justice she deserved. The murderer who committed this heinous felony only got time in prison. Is it not fair that this man should have received the death penalty after committing such a brutal murder? He murdered this poor mother and child and received an unfair punishment. If he were to have received the death penalty if would have done some just to the family. There is absolutely no way for the mother and child to receive full proper justice, but if the convict had gotten the death penalty it would be a step in the right direction. If someone such as a family member or a person who you are close with was to be murdered, would it not be fair for the crook who murdered them to receive the death penalty? It is only moral for that delinquent to suffer the same fate as
These people were executed cruelly by capital punishment in countries all over the globe. 970 of these people were women and children. They are all children. The countries allowing this barbaric method of punishment to happen have probably never thought about this scheme of punishment is actually successful in the deterring of crime. I have many reasons for arguing against capital punishment.
Fear has taken a hold of every man aboard this ship, as it should; our luck is as far gone as the winds that led us off course. For nights and days gusts beyond measure have forced us south, yet our vessel beauty, Le Serpent, stays afloat. The souls aboard her, lay at the mercy of this ruthless sea. Chaotic weather has turned the crew from noble seamen searching for glory and riches, to whimpering children. To stay sane I keep the holy trinity close to my heart and the lady on my mind. Desperation comes and goes from the men’s eyes, while the black, blistering clouds fasten above us, as endless as the ocean itself. The sea rocks our wood hull back and forth but has yet to flip her. The rocking forces our bodies to cling to any sturdy or available hinge, nook or rope, anything a man can grasp with a sea soaked hand. The impacts make every step a danger. We all have taken on a ghoulish complexion; the absence of sunlight led the weak souls aboard to fight sleep until sick. Some of us pray for the sun to rise but thunder constantly deafens our cries as it crackles above the mast. We have been out to sea for fifty-five days and we have been in this forsaken storm for the last seventeen.
Murder should be punished in a manner similar to the way it was committed. A man convicted of a cold-blooded shooting murder such as a drive-by shooting should go before a firing squad. Each man in that firing squad would fire one at a time so the convicted would not know when the angel of death would come for him. A man convicted of strangulation murder should be hung at high noon. A man convicted of a beating death should be slowly beaten until death comes. A Jeffery Dahmer style murderer should suffer dismemberment and decapitation.
A thirty five year old white male kidnaps and rapes two sisters, one eight years old and the other eleven. The man then brutally murders the two helpless children; letting one watch as the other one was killed. He then leaves the bloody and beaten bodies, of the innocent sisters, in the neighborhood playground. Does this man deserve to die? The death penalty is a necessary evil that has a positive effect on society today. The death penalty should be sought in cases that carry the death penalty as a form of punishment because retribution should be taken for the heinous crimes that are committed, people that commit crime or kill will do it again, and the death penalty deters crime.