Recent orders
Capital punishment refers to the practice of executing a person or criminal as a punishment for certain crimes after a proper
Criminology
Students Name
Institution of Affiliation
Date
Capital punishment refers to the practice of executing a person or criminal as a punishment for certain crimes after a proper legal trial (Hood & Hoyle, 2015). A state can only use the penalty if their constitution allows for the execution of criminals for serious crimes such as murder, treason fraud, adultery, certain types of fraud as well as rape to which are referred to as capital crimes. The phrase capital punishment is derived from a Latin word that means head. Capital punishment has been used in many countries around the globe while in some of the countries it is accepted. Capital punishment has aroused the dilemma and as well triggered the debate as to whether capital punishment is ethical and moral. The divisions have resulted in the provision of different views, with those supporting capital punishment having their reasons for their continued use while those who don’t use it have their reasons for opposing it.
The countries to which use capital punishment for the people who have committed heinous crimes such as murder claim that through capital punishment, justice prevails (Sarat, 2018). The main reason as to why the legal framework is instituted is to ensure that the offenders of the law are subjected to the judgement and which they are proven guilty or innocent. With the introduction of capital punishment as a form of punishing the offenders, it is therefore within the law that people who are found committing the heinous crimes such as murder, rape, terrorism and even treason should be subjected to face justice through capital punishment. The weight of the offence makes it possible to be classified as a heinous crime and therefore if the judge finds that there is compact evidence, consequently it is with no doubt that the person should face the right judgement. Justice is said to prevail if the offended is satisfied and the right punishment is given to the offender.
The other reason as to why the states using capital punishment to punish the offenders is that they claim that by executing a person for committing a certain crime, it will deter other potential criminals who wanted to commit the same or other related offences (Reid, 2015). With this in mind, the users of capital punishment can justify their actions as they base their arguments on the ground that it will deter future crimes from happening. People or the potential criminals are said to get afraid of being punished by death, and therefore, they are prevented from committing such crimes in future. Beside deterrence, punishment by death prevents re-offending, and this is another basis as to why it is allowed on some countries. When a person is punished by death, it means that the same person will never commit such or another similar crime in the future as they are eliminated from the face of the world. Removing such people such as adulterers, rapists and murderers prevent further corruption of the society’s morals, and therefore it contributes to the reshaping of the society.
Punishment by death is considered to be cheaper (Garrett, 2017). The states to which use capital punishment are of the argument that it doesn’t cost the nation much money to eliminate the lives of the offending individuals and this makes it a priority method of punishment in their country. They claim that holding criminals in prison for a life sentence is costly and requires a lot of resources and devotion to keep guard to the prisoners as well as fulfilling their basic needs. Considering that the cost of living is high, it will be much costly to meet the requirements of each prisoner. Holding criminals for life imprisonment has no threats to deter criminals from committing crimes, and more prisoners are being incarcerated. Capital punishment, therefore, reduces the cost of catering for the criminals.
However, despite the continued use of capital punishment by some countries, it is considered unethical by others and therefore has their reason for opposition. Those against death punishment argue that it is against human rights and violates the right to life of an individual (Waldron, 2017). Every person has the right to live as the constitution of their countries guarantees it. Instead of using capital punishment, those against capital punishment argue that other methods such as sentencing the criminals to life imprisonment would be of more benefit than terminating the life of an individual. Capital punishment is considered as being cruel and inhumane and therefore degrades the life of human being. All lifeforms are precious but the life of a person is more valuable than that of an animal, and thus, the life of a person should be preserved.
According to the religious perspective, terminating the life of a person is considered a sin and against the will of God. Christians claim that God is the sole provider of life and therefore no one has the ability or the permission to terminate another person’s life. According to the Bible, humans were created by God in his likeness and controlled their fate. It is, therefore, the duty and responsibility of God to terminate the life of his creations, and the humans are entrusted in keeping guard of their brother’s life but not terminating it (Sachedina, 2005). On the other hand, ending the life of a person will be reducing the value of human life, and God created each one of us equal implying that no one has the authority to terminate another person’s life. Instead of ending the life of a person, they should be left in the hands of God to decide their fate and as well punish them for their wrongdoings.
The use of death punishment does not perform the required obligation as more and more people get to be incarcerated due to the same crimes that are termed as being heinous (Carlsmith et al. 2002). The nations against the use of the death sentence claim that killing a person doesn’t deter another person to commit the same crime, especially for the extremist such as the terrorists. The terrorists believe that if they die, their place is reserved in heaven and therefore will not hesitate to commit the crimes because they are motivated by death. And therefore the continued use of capital punishment will only imply that more and more extremists have been killed and thus the primary purpose of deterrence doesn’t work as purported.
Execution of the innocent is another reason as to why some of the nations are against the continued use of capital punishment (Baumgartner et al. 2008). A person is considered guilty if only compact evidence linking the person to the crime. However, innocent people may be found in the scene of the crime and therefore may end up being held captive for the crimes that they never committed. The innocent people, thus, serve the sentence of another guilty person who is left roaming free in the streets. There is no way a person can explain his innocence if the evidence might link to them and this makes them suffer ending up to death from unknown crimes to them. Hasty and poorly conducted investigations may lead to the execution of innocent individuals and therefore the innocent end up being punished.
The dilemma of whether it is ethical for the continued use of capital punishment has triggered debates with each stakeholder having their opinion. According to my opinion, capital punishment is unethical and should be terminated to save the dignity of the life of humankind. Besides, there is no proven evidence that penalty by death deter people from committing similar crimes as more criminals are booked with the same charges that are punished by death. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the countries that have adopted capital punishment to pull it down and adopt other strategies such as subjecting the criminals to life imprisonment with inclusion for hard labor for their food.
References
Baumgartner, F. R., De Boef, S. L., & Boydstun, A. E. (2008). The decline of the death penalty and the discovery of innocence. Cambridge University Press.
Carlsmith, K. M., Darley, J. M., & Robinson, P. H. (2002). Why do we punish? Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment. Journal of personality and social psychology, 83(2), 284.
Garrett, B. L. (2017). End of Its Rope: How Killing the Death Penalty Can Revive Criminal Justice. Harvard University Press.
Hood, R., & Hoyle, C. (2015). The death penalty: A worldwide perspective. OUP Oxford.
Reid, S. T. (2015). Crime and criminology. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
Sachedina, A. (2005). End-of-life: the Islamic view. The lancet, 366(9487), 774-779.
Sarat, A. (2018). When the state kills: Capital punishment and the American condition. Princeton University Press.
Waldron, J. (2017). A right-based critique of constitutional rights. In Bills of Rights (pp. 3-36). Routledge.
Moonshiners, An Illegal Alcohol
Moonshiners, An Illegal Alcohol
Moonshine is an illegal alcohol that is produced from cereals and yeast combined together then fermented. The trade of making moonshine began in Europe after Saint Patrick brought this alchemy from Egypt (Dabney, 33) during the seventeenth century where it was used as a substitute for making wine during winter. Both the Spanish and English government demanded a lot of tax regarding any drink that had a higher percentage of alcohol preferably more than three percent (Institute of Man) from wine makers. Most of the European immigrants who moved to America during this time brought their knowledge about distillation to America. While in America, the moon shinning business continued being brewed especially in states such as Tennessee (Dabney, 134), Appalachia (Dabney, 76) and during this era, it was legal.
During the revolutionary war, the American government found it expensive financing its troops therefore the decision to place a tax on each and every liquor that was produced and consumed (Dabney, 53). As most of the pioneers of making moonshine originated from Europe and fled because of taxation, the majority of them continued making the liquor illegally without paying taxes. Farmers who acquired these skills discovered making moonshine from corn was more profitable as compared to selling their corn for other purposes (History of Moonshine). People discovered a new way of making moonshine and transporting it to the market (Institute of Man). During the United States Civil War, the government under the federal revenuers again looked for other means of getting money thus their attempts to crack down on the large number of illegal moonshine brewers and in the process, the whiskey rebellion began (Dabney, 67; Howell, 121). In the process many vehicles began transporting the liquor in petrol tanks to avoid being stalked by police thus brought about the rise of race companies including Nascar, which is a multibillion dollar company today (Howell, 8).
By definition of moonshine, it is unregulated and contains impurities (Smith, 394). One major side effect of drinking moonshine is the fact that it causes lead poisoning which can result in death or blindness (Smith, 394). Because of the soldering of the stills, the amount of lead deposited is great, when one consumes the alcohol the levels of lead salts build up in one’s body (Dabney, 223) and in the process cause poisoning. Methanol is an impure alcohol that triggers blindness among alcoholic consumers (Institute of Man). This compound is found in large quantities especially in the improper distilled moonshine.
Moonshine being an illegal brew, is made in the confines of the brewer’s residence but a good number of the brewers would hide their distilleries in forests or in deserted places (Dabney, 23) because of the stringent laws related to moon shinning brewers without licenses. The stills used are made of metal most probably copper (Dabney, 162). These stills also consist of a furnace, worm box with a tap, filter bucket, and a thump keg (History of Moonshine). Because most of the items can be found easily, most brewers come up with their recipe and brew the moonshine at home or in a secluded place and place traps in case of intrusion by the authorities (Dabney, 185). These stills can be contaminated because they use dangerous coolants like glycol, which is used as antifreeze in car engines (Institute of Man).
Moonshine is made by mixing corn, which is grounded in hot water. Sugar and yeast are later added to help in the fermentation process (Dabney, 1). The yeast being the main ingredient in making moonshine is the determining factor in the kind of alcohol produced (Institute of Man). Yeast feeds on sugars and gives alcohol as the byproduct together with carbon (V) oxide (Smith, 70). When put under good conditions the yeast can produce around twenty percent pure alcohol but this process of brewing can result in an increase in toxicity levels because of the presence of natural yeast (Institute of Man).
After addition of the mixture of corn, sugars and yeast in the still, it is heated thus making the alcohol evaporate. The evaporated alcohol is directed to the thump keg by means of a pipe (History of Moonshine). In the thump keg, the liquid alcohol is again reheated to get rid of any solid impurities from the first heating process (Dabney, xxv) then the gaseous alcohol is taken to the worm box in a coil inside the box (History of Moonshine). There is cool water in the worm Box used to condense the pure alcohol vapor into liquid (Dabney, xxii). The condensed liquid is then redirected to a filter bucket via the tap in the worm box. Due to the fact that this alcohol produced is illegal, as soon as they are produced, the brewers cannot keep them for long therefore the need to dispose off as soon as possible (History of Moonshine).
Brewers making the moonshine earn a lot of money (Dabney, 23). For them, the amount of money made was enough to bring up their children and live a healthy lifestyle (Dabney, 29). The majority of the materials used to make the alcohol can be found locally, are recyclable, and at a fairly cheap price (Institute of Man). Once the liquor is produced, it is sold fairly cheap (Dabney, 23) thereby attracting a huge number of followers and the profit margin obtained is great. The American government is responsible for collecting billions of shillings annually (Tsai) because liquor alone is worth to the American government as compared to beer or wine (Tsai).
In most states in America, it is legal to brew liquor at home but selling alcohol is prohibited without a permit. The Volstead Act, which was passed by the congress in 1919 (Dabney, 106) was enacted and enforced the subsequent year. This law was initially enforced to make alcohol expensive for the normal American and in the process, stress out the importance of living in an alcohol free environment (Cohen, 41) and prohibit consumption of illegal alcoholic beverages by the American society (History of Moonshine). Although it was met by a negative response by the majority especially the poor (Dabney, 106), the Volstead law made sure that alcoholic beverages produced were of the right alcohol content to be consumed by citizens.
The Blaine Act, which was passed during the late twentieth century. This law ended the prohibition of making spirits (History of Moonshine). A majority of legal brewers began making alcohol that is relatively cheaper to the American citizen therefore most of the moonshine brewers nearly ran out of business (History of Moonshine).
Consumption of alcohol is good because a large number of brewing companies have a legal permit with the required facilities used in making such beverages. Consumption of moonshine in most cases can be detrimental. There are health risks involved in consumption of such spirits. Due to the fact that these drinks are brewed in secrecy, the brewer might forget to consider the right conditions necessary to brew alcohol thus the yeast may end up building large doses of impurities. Another thing that should prevent people from consuming moonshine is the fact that the chambers used to heat the alcoholic mixtures are made from compounds of lead, which can cause serious health implications.
Works Cited
Cohen, Daniel. Prohibition. Minnesota: Millbrook Press, 1995
Dabney, Joseph Earl. Mountain spirits: a chronicle of corn whiskey from King James’ Ulster plantation to America’s Appalachians and the moonshine life. New York: Scribner, 1974.
Dabney, Joseph Earl. More mountain spirits: the continuing chronicle of moonshine life and corn whiskey, wines, ciders & beers in America’s Appalachians. North Carolina: Bright Mountain Books, 1980.
Howell, Mark D. From Moonshine to Madison Avenue: A Cultural History of the NASCAR Winston Cup Series. New Hampshire: Popular Press, 1997.
Smith, Andrew F. The Oxford Companion to American Food and Drink. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
“The History of Moonshine”. < HYPERLINK “http://habee.hubpages.com/hub/The-History-of-Moonshine” http://habee.hubpages.com/hub/The-History-of-Moonshine> December 03, 2012. The Institute of Man. “The Science and History of Moonshine”. 24 August 2011 < HYPERLINK “http://www.instituteofman.com/2011/08/24/the-science-and-history-of-moonshine/” http://www.instituteofman.com/2011/08/24/the-science-and-history-of-moonshine/> December 03, 2012.
Module 11
Module 11
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course
Instructor’s Name
Due Date
Various politicians have utilized multiple strategies to ensure gaining the trust of voters. The “Southern Strategy” is among these numerous strategies utilized in politics. It was the plan utilized successfully by Nixon to boost voting among white voters, specifically in the south. His campaign heavily emphasized state’s rights, law, and order to draw white voters that were focused on racial integration. Various critics claimed that the language utilized in this particular strategy was a wrong response concerning the civil rights movement’s success and an appeal to racists. Thus, the entire “Southern Strategy” preface was a call to racism, particularly against the Blacks, to acquire white voters’ support in the south (Carter, 2013). Some movements that happened in the 1960s and 1950s resulted in more in-depth Southern racial tension than before. The movements consisted of the Voting Rights Act and Jim Crow Laws demolition.
Several approaches to the “Southern Strategy” existed throughout politics from multiple politicians such as George Wallace and Richard Nixon. Nixon’s “Southern Strategy,” when compared to Lee Atwater’s strategy, there was a relatively similar approach to the present issue, especially in examining the directions of the approaches. In his ill-famed interview, Lee Atwater talked about establishing a more theoretical way of handling America’s racial issues that would contribute to a considerable agreement among all people. He argued that Blacks are getting more abstract by talking about states’ rights and forced busing (The Nation, 2012). In addition, he said that his generation would be the Southerners’ initial generation that would not be biased. Therefore, Atwater’s strategy was similar to Nixon’s “Southern Strategy.”
George Wallace was specifically driven by raw emotions and rage, which resulted in him becoming an influence and power position. His utilization of religion and fear in the various speeches he made enabled Wallace to obtain a trusted following that believed all his words were laying a base for the republican party’s dominance. Thus, Carter showed his idea concerning ‘Wallace Factor’ by highlighting that “the trick for candidates who hoped to benefit from the ‘Wallace Factor’ was to exploit the grievances he had unleashed while disentangling themselves from the more tawdry trappings of his message”; this explained gathering a voter fundamental constructed on factors and performance showed by Wallace and simultaneously avoiding the unnecessary and profane elements that may contribute to the specific candidates losing various voters from varying localities (Carter, 2013). Thus, it meant in case a certain candidate had the ability to capitalize on these specific ideals without necessarily getting stuck in the message. Hence, they would obtain success at that point.
Atwater showed a similar political strategy in his infamous interview when arguing the Republican Party’s rise beginning the 1970s to 1990s. His strategy to encourage the Republican Party had similar agenda involving pleasing white southerners. However, he used a considerably subtle dialect to keep away from critics from various more liberal voters. Lee Atwater discussed support gained for the Republican Party utilizing various economic policies. These were to be the platform’s face, but these particular policies would affect the black race negatively. In addition, Atwater utilized varying tactics compared to different republicans, where he appealed to white extremists in a considerably mild way.
Carter, in contrast to Atwater, had a belief that the Republican Party’s rise, particularly in the south, was established on the base Wallace had developed. I agree with this idea of Carter because the vibration of such dramatized and religious politics is presently visible in the south. The southern fear and faith concerned with politics significantly reflect the passion visible in various of Wallace’s campaigns.
Moreover, Atwater’s approach utilized multiple similar tricks that Carter’s book describes; this included the cover he had concerning the fundamental racist strategies in his existing political manifesto. For instance, the “Wallace Factor” is among the described similar trick that exploited the demands that Wallace had seen from other people to ensure acquiring their trust and obtaining his position in the office. He was then to carry out what he desired after gaining office. Similarly, Atwater explained the similar tactic of communicating significant abstract issues and avoiding being more detailed on the campaign’s aims but progressing in gaining voters’ trust.
Willie Horton’s ads critics were fair to say that they were racism-masked ads. The primary focus while watching the ads involves how Dukakis desired to permit weekend prison passes and declined to be involved with the death penalty for individuals with first-degree murder convictions. An African American, Willie Horton, is among the inmate focused on the ads (RETRO REPORT, 2016). He was arrested for rape, murder, and robbery. Therefore, they chose a Black American rather than any inmate and utilized his race to affect Dukakis’ rally further, specifically fighting against the death penalty.
References
Carter, D. T. (2013). The politics of rage : George Wallace, the origins of the new conservatism, and the transformation of American politics. Louisiana State University Press.
RETRO REPORT. (2016). Willie Horton: Political Ads That Changed the Game | Retro Report. Www.youtube.com. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdJ97qWHOxo
The Nation. (2012). Exclusive: Lee Atwater’s Infamous 1981 Interview on the Southern Strategy. Www.youtube.com. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_8E3ENrKrQ