Moralities and Politics of Justice
Artist Statement
My project is about the moral and ethical debate centered around the death penalty. My perspective is that the death penalty is immoral and should be abolished in the United States. The poster is simple because to me a simple statement will leave a better message for the audience compared to an elaborate poster that the meaning is unclear.
I originally made my rough draft in Photoshop then traced it onto the foam board so it could be painted. Then I projected my picture onto the poster board so that I could trace it. I chose to paint the background black to add an eerie, dark, cold tone to the poster. The words are similar to dripping blood to represent all the blood that is shed for and because of the death penalty. “Humane” and “Killing” are in red to emphasize how those are the two main part of my argument and how the two words contradict each other. I painted the lethal injection chair bright grey and centered it so that people’s eyes would be drawn directly to it first. The quote is in silver to stand
I refined my project by doing it first in Photoshop to make rough draft and find the proper set up and formatting for it to be affective. Then on the foam board I first did coat of black paint on the background and then going over with a second and third coat while painting in the same direction. I did multiple coats on the table to make sure that it would stand out and have an even coat. If I were to do this project again, I would either use a different median for my poster or take time to do thin but multiple coats of paint to give it a more of a refined look.
I originally made my rough draft in Photoshop then traced it onto the foam board so it could be painted. Then I projected my picture onto the poster board so that I could trace it. I chose to paint the background black to add an eerie, dark, cold tone to the poster. The words are similar to dripping blood to represent all the blood that is shed for and because of the death penalty. “Humane” and “Killing” are in red to emphasize how those are the two main part of my argument and how the two words contradict each other. I painted the lethal injection chair bright grey and centered it so that people’s eyes would be drawn directly to it first. The quote is in silver to stand
I refined my project by doing it first in Photoshop to make rough draft and find the proper set up and formatting for it to be affective. Then on the foam board I first did coat of black paint on the background and then going over with a second and third coat while painting in the same direction. I did multiple coats on the table to make sure that it would stand out and have an even coat. If I were to do this project again, I would either use a different median for my poster or take time to do thin but multiple coats of paint to give it a more of a refined look.
The Death Penalty: Just another Form of Torture
We kill people who kill people because killing people is wrong. That seems very hypocritical doesn’t it? The death penalty is essentially that— killing others because they killed others, basically leading down a rabbit-hole full of death. This cycle has existed for centuries and has become less of a threat. The death penalty is outdated and inefficient in our modern society, and more modernized punishments, such as life without parole, will still ensure the security of society while maintaining the essential liberty of criminals.
On December 12, 2013 the Federal Death Penalty Abolition Act was introduced to House- Armed Services and on January 27, 2014 it was referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations (H.R.3741). The purpose of this act would be to remove the death penalty from most, if not all, federal crimes and, in turn, sentence criminals to life without parole. However, this act has yet to be passed and made into a law, since it is still working it’s through the many branches of the government. It’s been far too long of a wait; Congress needs to hurry up and pass the act.
The death penalty has been around since 1700 BCE and was a law in the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon (Part I). The first ways to fulfill the death penalty were crucifixion, drowning, beatings, burning alive and impalement. Then, starting in 900 CE, newer methods became more common, methods such as hanging, beheading (1500 CE), drawing and quartering, electric chair (1890), cyanide gas (1924) and the lethal injection (Part I).
Some of the punishments were far worse than others. Drawing and quartering is probably the most gruesome of all and due to that was only applied to males who committed treason. The criminal is tied to a wooden hurdle and then is dragged behind the horse to the gallows. He/she is then hung until near death at which time he/she ends up having their organs removed, beheaded, and finally chopping up the rest of the body into small pieces (New).
Drawing and Quartering was one of the cruelest and most unusual punishments to exist. Thus the creation of the Eighth Amendment which states that cruel and unusual punishments cannot be applied to prisoners. Strapping someone to a table, injecting them with a poison, and restraining them until they die, while more humane, is still a cruel and unusual punishment. Yes, the death penalty has evolved to be more humane but how is killing ever humane?
Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794) was one of the earliest philosophers to condemn the death penalty. Beccaria published On Crimes and Punishments in 1764. In which he explains why the death penalty is wrong. He argues that it is a useless punishment, doesn’t improve mankind, is not forceful enough to deter criminals, and it is not mankind’s right to issue the death penalty (Roland).
On the last point Beccaria states, “what right, I ask, have men to cut throats of their fellow-creatures?” Beccaria saw this flaw of the legal system three hundred years ago and we have yet to amend it. Men do not have the right nor the authority to kill other men.
Beccaria was one of the earliest people to advocate against the death penalty but there were others too. In 1779 Thomas Jefferson introduced a bill in Virginia that would limit the death penalty to only crimes of treason and murder. In 1792 Benjamin Rush questioned the effectiveness of the death penalty as a deterrent. He believed that the death penalty actually increased crimes rather than reducing crime (Part I).
Rush raises a very controversial point. On the one hand the death penalty is claiming to deter crime since people value their life. However, on the other hand, the death penalty has been around for too long and does not hold enough threat to actually deter crime.
In 1794 Pennsylvania repealed the death penalty so that it only applied to first degree murders. Abolishing the death penalty has been a slow process that is not even halfway complete in the US. 32 states still use the death penalty along with the US Government and Military (States). Only 18 States have abolished the death penalty as well as the District of Columbia. In 1846, Michigan was the first state to completely abolish the death penalty while Maryland was the latest to join the no death penalty bandwagon as of 2013. However, the abolishment was not retroactive, meaning that the repeal did not apply to cases already in actions so 5 people were left on death row after the abolishment
In addition, keeping prisoners locked up in a cage for the rest of their life would be a sufficient punishment. Cesare mentions that the death penalty is not necessary unless the human is a threat to the government in a time of anarchy or a change of liberty and that for the punishment to be just, it must only be as severe as sufficient to deter others. A life without freedom, suffering from the guilt of the crimes should be efficient enough to deter future crimes.
Finally, the death penalty is far more expensive. In 2003 Kansas created an assessment in which they discovered that, on average, a single death penalty case costs $1.2 million dollars while life without parole on costs $0.7 million dollars per case (77 California). This money, the tax payers’ money, is being wasted on criminals when instead the money could be used to improve the states well-being.
The death penalty has been around for far too long and no longer keeps society in check. How can our civilization progress if we have not abolished the most barbaric practice for our own society? It’s long past time for Congress to pass the act and abolish the death penalty once and for all.
Word Count: 971
Work Cited
California Commission On The Fair Administration Of Justice, Comp. "Report And Recommendations Of
The Administration Of The Death Penalty In California." (n.d.): n. pag. Death Penalty Focus. 30
June 2008. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
<http://www.deathpenalty.org/downloads/FINAL%20REPORT%20DEATH%20PENALTY%20ccfaj%20June%2030.2008.pdf>.
"H.R.3741 - Federal Death Penalty Abolition Act of 2013113th Congress (2013-2014)."
Congress.Gov. Library of Congress, 12 Dec. 2013. Web. 9 Oct. 2014.
New World Encyclopedia Contributors. "Drawing and Quartering." New World Encyclopedia. N.p., 10 Feb.
2010. Web. 16 Oct. 2014.
"Part I: History of the Death Penalty." DPIC. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Oct. 2014.
Roland, Jon. "Cesare Beccaria: Of Crimes and Punishments." Cesare Beccaria: Of Crimes and
Punishments. Constitution Society, 3 Sept. 1997. Web. 15 Oct. 2014
"States With and Without the Death Penalty." DPIC. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2014.
On December 12, 2013 the Federal Death Penalty Abolition Act was introduced to House- Armed Services and on January 27, 2014 it was referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations (H.R.3741). The purpose of this act would be to remove the death penalty from most, if not all, federal crimes and, in turn, sentence criminals to life without parole. However, this act has yet to be passed and made into a law, since it is still working it’s through the many branches of the government. It’s been far too long of a wait; Congress needs to hurry up and pass the act.
The death penalty has been around since 1700 BCE and was a law in the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon (Part I). The first ways to fulfill the death penalty were crucifixion, drowning, beatings, burning alive and impalement. Then, starting in 900 CE, newer methods became more common, methods such as hanging, beheading (1500 CE), drawing and quartering, electric chair (1890), cyanide gas (1924) and the lethal injection (Part I).
Some of the punishments were far worse than others. Drawing and quartering is probably the most gruesome of all and due to that was only applied to males who committed treason. The criminal is tied to a wooden hurdle and then is dragged behind the horse to the gallows. He/she is then hung until near death at which time he/she ends up having their organs removed, beheaded, and finally chopping up the rest of the body into small pieces (New).
Drawing and Quartering was one of the cruelest and most unusual punishments to exist. Thus the creation of the Eighth Amendment which states that cruel and unusual punishments cannot be applied to prisoners. Strapping someone to a table, injecting them with a poison, and restraining them until they die, while more humane, is still a cruel and unusual punishment. Yes, the death penalty has evolved to be more humane but how is killing ever humane?
Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794) was one of the earliest philosophers to condemn the death penalty. Beccaria published On Crimes and Punishments in 1764. In which he explains why the death penalty is wrong. He argues that it is a useless punishment, doesn’t improve mankind, is not forceful enough to deter criminals, and it is not mankind’s right to issue the death penalty (Roland).
On the last point Beccaria states, “what right, I ask, have men to cut throats of their fellow-creatures?” Beccaria saw this flaw of the legal system three hundred years ago and we have yet to amend it. Men do not have the right nor the authority to kill other men.
Beccaria was one of the earliest people to advocate against the death penalty but there were others too. In 1779 Thomas Jefferson introduced a bill in Virginia that would limit the death penalty to only crimes of treason and murder. In 1792 Benjamin Rush questioned the effectiveness of the death penalty as a deterrent. He believed that the death penalty actually increased crimes rather than reducing crime (Part I).
Rush raises a very controversial point. On the one hand the death penalty is claiming to deter crime since people value their life. However, on the other hand, the death penalty has been around for too long and does not hold enough threat to actually deter crime.
In 1794 Pennsylvania repealed the death penalty so that it only applied to first degree murders. Abolishing the death penalty has been a slow process that is not even halfway complete in the US. 32 states still use the death penalty along with the US Government and Military (States). Only 18 States have abolished the death penalty as well as the District of Columbia. In 1846, Michigan was the first state to completely abolish the death penalty while Maryland was the latest to join the no death penalty bandwagon as of 2013. However, the abolishment was not retroactive, meaning that the repeal did not apply to cases already in actions so 5 people were left on death row after the abolishment
In addition, keeping prisoners locked up in a cage for the rest of their life would be a sufficient punishment. Cesare mentions that the death penalty is not necessary unless the human is a threat to the government in a time of anarchy or a change of liberty and that for the punishment to be just, it must only be as severe as sufficient to deter others. A life without freedom, suffering from the guilt of the crimes should be efficient enough to deter future crimes.
Finally, the death penalty is far more expensive. In 2003 Kansas created an assessment in which they discovered that, on average, a single death penalty case costs $1.2 million dollars while life without parole on costs $0.7 million dollars per case (77 California). This money, the tax payers’ money, is being wasted on criminals when instead the money could be used to improve the states well-being.
The death penalty has been around for far too long and no longer keeps society in check. How can our civilization progress if we have not abolished the most barbaric practice for our own society? It’s long past time for Congress to pass the act and abolish the death penalty once and for all.
Word Count: 971
Work Cited
California Commission On The Fair Administration Of Justice, Comp. "Report And Recommendations Of
The Administration Of The Death Penalty In California." (n.d.): n. pag. Death Penalty Focus. 30
June 2008. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
<http://www.deathpenalty.org/downloads/FINAL%20REPORT%20DEATH%20PENALTY%20ccfaj%20June%2030.2008.pdf>.
"H.R.3741 - Federal Death Penalty Abolition Act of 2013113th Congress (2013-2014)."
Congress.Gov. Library of Congress, 12 Dec. 2013. Web. 9 Oct. 2014.
New World Encyclopedia Contributors. "Drawing and Quartering." New World Encyclopedia. N.p., 10 Feb.
2010. Web. 16 Oct. 2014.
"Part I: History of the Death Penalty." DPIC. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Oct. 2014.
Roland, Jon. "Cesare Beccaria: Of Crimes and Punishments." Cesare Beccaria: Of Crimes and
Punishments. Constitution Society, 3 Sept. 1997. Web. 15 Oct. 2014
"States With and Without the Death Penalty." DPIC. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2014.
Project Reflection
The purpose of this project was to learn how to apply moral philosophies to current issues. We began this project by learning about the different aspects of Libertarianism, Utilitarianism, Deontology, and Justice as Fairness. After learning each of those philosophies we then chose a current controversial topic, i.e. Gun control, abortion, death penalty, animal testing etc., and wrote an Op-Ed about it. Within the Op-Ed there had to be at least one philosopher, the use of pathos, ethos, and logos, and a suggested resolution to the issue based upon that philosophy. After writing the Op-Ed I made an art piece that included ethos, pathos, and/or logos. Combined the Op-Ed and the art piece gave a powerful message.
My perspective on the death penalty did not change however, it did strengthen. When I wrote my Op-Ed I had to learn how to write objectively while still adding emotions to persuade my audience and show my perspective. It isn’t just enough to spout all these historical facts or current statistics, I have to add feelings that people can relate to. I used a lot of advocacy when I presented my political perspective. I spoke up for my beliefs on the topic and I used evidence to back it up. Through this project I learned that I use more statistics than anything else so it was a challenge for me to write in such a way to evoke emotions from my audience. I worked through this challenge by being more descriptive in some of the methods used in the death penalty.
My strongest piece of my Op-Ed was my use of evidenced. I used background information such as the origin of the death penalty and various methods used, I also used more modern statistics such as the cost of the death penalty compared to life without parole in Kansas. By using these types of evidence I was able to show how outdated the death penalty actually is and how expensive and inefficient the death penalty is. My weakest section would be Rhetoric and Argument. In my Op-Ed the only logos I use is the cost of the death penalty in Kansas, I could have added more statistics into my Op-Ed to further prove my point.
If I had more time to work on my Op-Ed I would’ve added more statistics like the racial ratio for people on death row. This would have added to the idea the death penalty was inefficient.
My perspective on the death penalty did not change however, it did strengthen. When I wrote my Op-Ed I had to learn how to write objectively while still adding emotions to persuade my audience and show my perspective. It isn’t just enough to spout all these historical facts or current statistics, I have to add feelings that people can relate to. I used a lot of advocacy when I presented my political perspective. I spoke up for my beliefs on the topic and I used evidence to back it up. Through this project I learned that I use more statistics than anything else so it was a challenge for me to write in such a way to evoke emotions from my audience. I worked through this challenge by being more descriptive in some of the methods used in the death penalty.
My strongest piece of my Op-Ed was my use of evidenced. I used background information such as the origin of the death penalty and various methods used, I also used more modern statistics such as the cost of the death penalty compared to life without parole in Kansas. By using these types of evidence I was able to show how outdated the death penalty actually is and how expensive and inefficient the death penalty is. My weakest section would be Rhetoric and Argument. In my Op-Ed the only logos I use is the cost of the death penalty in Kansas, I could have added more statistics into my Op-Ed to further prove my point.
If I had more time to work on my Op-Ed I would’ve added more statistics like the racial ratio for people on death row. This would have added to the idea the death penalty was inefficient.