Retributivist arguments against capital punishment

Journal of Social Philosophy 35 (2):188–197 (2004)

Authors
Thom Brooks
Durham University
Abstract
This article argues that even if we grant that murderers may deserve death in principle, retributivists should still oppose capital punishment. The reason? Our inability to know with certainty whether or not individuals possess the necessary level of desert. In large part due to advances in science, we can only be sure that no matter how well the trial is administered or how many appeals are allowed or how many years we let elapse, we will continue to execute innocent persons for as long as we legalize capital punishment. Thus, on grounds of desert, this article argues that retributivists should oppose capital punishment.
Keywords punishment  retribution  retributivism  death penalty  capital punishment  fairness
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9833.2004.00224.x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 38,928
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Structure of Death Penalty Arguments.Matt Stichter - 2014 - Res Publica 20 (2):129-143.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
405 ( #10,248 of 2,319,041 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
43 ( #11,383 of 2,319,041 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature