Should life imprisonment without the possibility of parole replace the Research Paper

Should life imprisonment without the possibility of parole replace the death penalty in California - Research Paper Example Proponents of the Death penalty believe that people fear death and if death is the punishment for killing someone, they would refrain from it. They believe that in order to have a just system in place where the victim’s family is put to ease it is important to have an eye for eye approach. The criminal is guilty of taking someone’s life so he is liable to give up his. If the person is mentally unstable to have done so it makes him more dangerous to the society’s well-being and putting him to death is the only way to ensure such crimes do not take place through his hands again. However, opponents of the death penalty have a strong viewpoint as well. They believe that every life is precious and shouldn’t be given up on. If taking a life is a crime, no one should be allowed to do it, including the government. If a criminal is guilty committing of capital offense he should subjected to punishments that take away his life figuratively, not literally. Also, many believe that taking away a criminal’s life is too easy on him, the real punishment would be him leading a hard life that prologs his sufferings for the crime he committed. Executing a death penalty is costly for the governments as such cases are tried for a long time resulting in jury expenditures and security arrangements for the courts. Lastly and most importantly, it is morally wrong to take a life to stop crimes when the same purpose can be achieved through other means effectively like life without parole. The enforcement of death penalty is highly dependent on the society’s co nstruct and the public opinion (Wood 63). If a society holds strong political and ideological interest, it is likely that capital offenses are awarded strict punishments like death penalty to keep up the societal balance and sanctity of its socio-political ideology. Secondly, public opinion is a determinant of having the death penalty in place. Where many people have a humanitarian approach with a soft spot for life in general, whether a convict’s or a victim’s, many people still believe that the death penalty is the only way to keep crimes at their minimal and bring relief to the victims’ family. In the developing world, death penalty is seen to be an active form of justice, but the developed countries also have a hard time putting it to an end. As far as the US is concerned, 31 states out of 52 states in the U.S. still practice the death penalty, including California. In 2006, the District Court judge declared that the death penalty was against the eighth amen dment of the United States constitution that states that the federal government is liable to refrain from cruel punishments including torture and unusual punishments. The then governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, took this declaration

Leadership question 1 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Leadership question 1 - Essay Example , portrays a strong personality and makes effective decisions at the time of conflict, among his key influencers are pertinent beliefs in proportionality, not being rational and empathizing with his enemy. He explains that rationality is inconsequential in a time of conflict and a leader must therefore make decisions based on their judgments of the situations. Most conflicts are always irrational; he thus explains that making rational decisions at such times may only cost a leader his or her subjects. Proportionality is his guiding principles as he employs the resources he had. The resources often range from the human resources to financial and material resource among many others. Leaders must portray strong personalities capable of making judgments that safeguard the interests of their resources. Robert McNamara’s success arose from his ability to budget for the resources at his disposal appropriately. This way, he made decisions that protected the interests of both the country and his subjects. Additionally, he explains that empathizing with the enemy is a sure way of making functional decisions especially in times of conflicts. Such is a rational philosophy owing to the fact that in conflicts only the two parties exit. Each party thus makes decisions based on the prevailing circumstances of the other. By empathizing with the enemy, it becomes possible either to end the conflict or to compel the enemy to act in a particular manner thus solving the conflict amicably as he did in most of his time as the secretary of defense (James, Langan and Sarah 6). The film portrays Robert McNamara as a strong and independent mined individual who control an entire government department at a time of conflict successfully. Among his strengths are independent personality which enabled him make and take responsibility of his decisions. As a government secretary, Robert McNamara would have taken instructions from the government through the president. Instead, he often consulted