Ordinal proportionality in punishment: A case against capital punishment for child rape under the eighth amendment
Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||This article argues that various theories of justice in punishment adhere to a principle of ordinal proportionality - relative grading of penalties in measure to the relative severity of the crimes for which they are imposed. Ordinal proportionality is a demand of both deterrence and retributive theories of justice; in addition it is a tenet well entrenched in the Supreme Court's current Eighth Amendment jurisprudence. Under this principle the state cannot subject the crime of child rape to capital punishment because even a crime as horrendous as rape is not on par with murder in terms of harm and blameworthiness.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Oliver O'Donovan (1977). Measure for Measure: Justice in Punishment and the Sentence of Death. Grove Books.
William A. Edmundson (1984). Death Penalties: A Review of Raoul Berger, Death Penalties. [REVIEW] Duke Law Journal 1984:624-29.
Patrick Lenta & Douglas Farland (2008). Desert, Justice and Capital Punishment. Criminal Law and Philosophy 2 (3):273-290.
Thom Brooks (2004). Retributivist Arguments Against Capital Punishment. Journal of Social Philosophy 35 (2):188–197.
Greg Roebuck & David Wood (2011). A Retributive Argument Against Punishment. Criminal Law and Philosophy 5 (1):73-86.
William A. Edmundson (2002). Afterword: Proportionality and the Difference Death Makes. Criminal Justice Ethics 21 (2):40-43.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads31 ( #44,838 of 722,936 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 722,936 )
How can I increase my downloads?