Is the Sentence of Death Appropriate for Those Who do not Kill Essay

Is the Sentence of Death Appropriate for Those Who do not Kill - Essay Example An even bigger debate can be ignited on the issue of the death penalty concerning those that participate in what is considered a capital crime, but do not actually commit the crime themselves. In deciding this issue, and in respect to the Eighth Amendment prohibiting â€Å"cruel and unusual punishment†, the Supreme Court has adopted both a subjective and an objective approach, swinging back and forth between the one that serves objectively to the one that serves subjectively, and back again to the more objective method. In this paper, we examine both approaches, as well as personal opinions regarding them. Introduction The death penalty, as decided and imposed by the laws of the United States of America, has a long and illustrious history of being debated, enacted, struck down, and otherwise discussed. Though the United States is the only democracy in the Western Hemisphere that actually retains the use of the death penalty as a punishment to criminals, it demands certain crit eria and other factors are present before it comes into consideration or is used as a part of the criminal process (Scheb & Scheb II, 2011). Complicating the debates that surround the death penalty are those cases which question its use in punishing those that were not actually involved directly with the capital crimes committed, yet received the death penalty as a sentence; the same applies to those that were juveniles at the time they committed a capital crime and when the mental status of a suspect or defendant is challenged and/or proven to be of such a nature that he or she could not have understood the crime that they were committing. In the article â€Å"Executing Those Who Do Not Kill: A Categorical Approach to Proportional Sentencing†, by Joseph Trigilio and Tracy Casadio, we are asked to examine the historical and current policies of the United States Supreme Court in regards to those who are only accomplices in felony cases, cases in which they did not kill or inte nd to kill, with regards to the view on the sentence of capital punishment, especially given the criteria that the death penalty may be viewed as â€Å"cruel and unusual punishment† as per the United States Constitution, Amendment VIII. Given the extent of the debate on the death penalty itself, even in light of recent legislation that has banned its use in cases concerning juveniles and those of diminished mental capacity it is not an exaggeration to say that the death penalty, while not taken lightly as a part of the criminal process, will never lose its status as a debated issue, even among the United States Supreme Court. Objective versus Subjective Approach The Supreme Court of the United States has succeeded in bouncing back and forth in differing methods of evaluation for capital punishment. There was a time that an objective approach was taken, such as in the cases of Enmund v. Florida 458 U.S. 782 (1982), 399 So.2d 1362 (Fla. 1981), 454 U.S. 939 (1981) and Coker v. G eorgia 433 U.S. 584, 97 S. Ct. 2861, 53 L. Ed. 2d 982 (1977). Though a two part analysis took into account the objective factors of current legislation at the time of the decision as well as a subjective analysis involving human dignity as it related to the use of capital punishment as a means of retribution and deterrence for crimes, the fact remained that cases were decided based on objective means (Trigilio & Casadio, 2011). This method was then applied to many cases, including Coker v. Georgia

The History of William Pens Statue Research Paper

The History of William Pens Statue - Research Paper Example Although born in an Anglican family, William Penn changed his religious views and joined â€Å"the religious society of friends† or â€Å"Quakers†. Quakers oppose war and violence and obey the divine light that they believe is present within each person. Since their beliefs opposed the Christian religion, they faced many hardships until William Penn managed to get a colonial province of West New Jersey. His implementation of democratic structure in this province included â€Å"full freedom of religion, fair trials, elected representatives of the people in power and a separation of powers†. American constitution is inspired from this democratic system of Penn (ushistory.org). He believed in fair treatment and complete religious freedom. He wrote once â€Å"True religion does not draw men out of the world but enables them to live better in it†. He was arrested a number of times due to his difference of beliefs. Yet the most famous among his trials is the one which eventually gave the freedom to the juries of England and made them independent and out of influence from the judges. William Penn also planned and developed the â€Å"City of Brotherly Love†, Philadelphia (Somerville, 2006). Due to the overcrowding at the old 18th-century city hall at fifth and Chestnut Street, a public election was held in 1870 to decide the new location of a city hall in Philadelphia. Penn Square was the new location that received 51, 623 votes. The architecture of this new city hall was designed by John MacArthur Jr. who immigrated to America from Scotland. William Penn’s statue was not originally included in his design (Hornblum, 2003). The inclusion of a statue was requested by the building commission, which was designed by Alexander Milne Calder, who immigrated to America as well in 1869 (pewtrusts.org). The construction of city hall was completed in 1901 with the intention of making it the world’s tallest building. The Eiffel tower  and Washington monument, however, grabbed that uniqueness from it. Yet it is still the world’s largest masonry building in the world.