Does one who kills another \"deserve\" to die? Why or why not? Are there circums

ID: 1201955 • Letter: D

Question

Does one who kills another "deserve" to die? Why or why not? Are there circumstances that would change your answer? Make two lists (perhaps using a table with two columns). In one column, list the circumstances in which a killer would deserve to die; in the other, list circumstances in which a killer would NOT deserve to die. Now analyze factors that set the two lists apart, such as:

Qualities of the killer?

Previous circumstances or actions of the victim?

Qualities of the victim?

Qualities of the intention behind the act?

Features of the society in which the killing takes place?

Calculations of the likely consequences of assigning that particular penalty to that kind of act?

What does the exercise tell you about your tendency to rely on deontological or utilitarian reasoning? What does it tell you about your sense of the sacredness of human life?

Explanation / Answer

A person who kills another should not deserve to die. Although killing is a crime but it should not be punished through another killing, since life is precious of all and it should be protected, rather destroying it.

The required table is as below:

Factors

Deserve to die

Would not deserve to die

Qualities of the killer

Professional

Non professional or accidental

Previous circumstances or actions of the victim

Neutral action

Indulging action

Qualities of the victim

Noble character

Notorious character

Qualities of the intention

Pre-planned

Without the pre-plan

Feature of the society

Upper class

Poor class

Calculation of penalty

Should be imposed

On the moral ground, the tendency is to charge penalty to the killer and avoid the sentence of death.

It tells about the necessity of life, which should protected by any means.