During the 1990s, legislation was introduced in Texas that would result in a finger being amputated for each conviction of a drug dealer. This bill was an effort to imitate the penalty for theft in some Islamic countries
How would each ethical system evaluate this proposed punishment?
Formalism, virtue ethics, and utilitarianism would view such a punishment quite differently. The formalist would only allow this punishment if the drug dealer deserved it and was truly blameworthy. Moreover, the amputation would have to be proportionate to the seriousness of the offense. It is the past conduct of drug dealing that would have to merit the amputation. Virtue ethics thinkers would examine whether the amputation would provide civil peace and protect liberty from those who would infringe on it. Rendering a proper punishment must be carried out in accordance with the moral virtues—thus, nothing in excess or deficiency (i.e. only the "mean.") Utilitiarians would only be concerned with whether the amputation would deter this drug dealer, along with other would-be dealers, thereby attaining a greater good. The seriousness of the offense would not be as important as the future impact of the sentence.
You might also like to view...
A statement obtained in an interrogation that violates Miranda cannot be used by police to find leads that are admissible in evidence against the suspect
Indicate whether the statement is true or false
Which of the following is not a legal excuse that may be used as a defense to homicide?
A. Consent B. Age C. Involuntary intoxication D. Insanity
Which of the following perspectives assumes that events can be explained in causal rather than volitional terms?
a. Classical b. Neo-classical c. Impressionist d. Positivism
Which of the following is not a function performed by juries?
A) Prevent government oppression B) Represent diverse communities C) Generating interest in the case through real-time tweets D) Determine whether the accused is guilty or innocent E) ?Symbolizing the rule of law.