Smrtna kazen : pro et contra

Makarić, Danijel

| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font

First page > Show document

Show document

Title:	Smrtna kazen : pro et contra
Authors:	ID Makarić, Danijel (Author) ID Flander, Benjamin (Mentor) More about this mentor...
Files:	VS_Makaric_Danijel_2014.pdf (707,29 KB) MD5: C2E1A6DEA4F5657E09EBF2D6AEFBBE50
Language:	Slovenian
Work type:	Bachelor thesis/paper
Typology:	2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis
Organization:	FVV - Faculty of Criminal Justice and Security
Abstract:	Diplomska naloga prikazuje argumente za in proti smrtni kazni. Največji poudarek je namenjen argumentom za smrtno kazen, ki smo jih preučili skozi različne raziskave, članke, knjige in podobno. Cilj naloge je ugotoviti, na čem temeljijo argumenti, ki govorijo v prid smrtne kazni ter če je možno te argumente tudi ovreči. V nalogi smo prikazali tudi uporabo smrtne kazni skozi zgodovino, razvoj kazni na slovenskih tleh skozi čas oziroma v času različnih vladavin ter uporabo kapitalne kazni v lanskem letu. Prišli smo do poznanja, da smrtna kazen ne povečuje varnosti družbe, čeprav onemogoči prestopnika, da bi v prihodnosti nadaljeval s kaznivimi dejanji in na ta način deluje preventivno. Vendar ni edina kazen, ki ima tak učinek, tudi dolgotrajne zaporne kazni onemogočajo prestopniku, da bi nadaljeval s kaznivimi dejanji in so za razliko od usmrtitve veliko bolj humane. Smrtna kazen le v redkih primerih deluje zastrašujoče zoper potencialne prestopnike, njeni učinki generalne prevencije so omejeni in se odražajo v majhnem obsegu. Države, ki uporabljajo smrtno kazen, nimajo manjšega števila "težkih" kaznivih dejanj kot njene sosede, ki so smrtno kazen odpravile. Tudi argument ekonomičnosti je povsem zgrešen, saj smrtna kazen ne privarčuje denarja, ki bi ga država imela z vzdrževanjem prestopnikov, ampak ravno nasprotno. Stroški, ki spremljajo smrtno kazen, so izjemno visoki in predstavljajo veliko finančno breme državi in davkoplačevalcem, to jasno dokazuje primer ZDA z njenimi stroški s kapitalno kaznijo. To, da so v manj razvitih državah tretjega sveta, kot so Severna Koreja, Iran, Somalija in nekatere druge, stroški najverjetneje bistveno nižji, in zato v jurisdikcijah teh držav obstaja možnost, da je smrtna kazen ekonomično upravičena, po našem mnenju ne more biti legitimen argument v podporo smrtni kazni. Kot zadnji argument se pojavlja argument pravičnosti, ki je prav tako zgrešen, saj nihče nima pravice vzeti življenja, tudi če gre za državo. Stanje glede smrtne kazni v svetu se z leti bistveno izboljšuje, skoraj je sto držav smrtno kazen odpravilo za vse vrste zločinov, veliko pa je takšnih, ki smrtno kazen imajo, vendar je v praksi že več let ne uporabljajo.
Keywords:	kaznovanje, kazni, smrtna kazen, usmrtitve, diplomske naloge
Place of publishing:	[Ljubljana
Publisher:	D. Makarić]
Year of publishing:	2014
PID:	20.500.12556/DKUM-43982
UDC:	343.25(043.2)
COBISS.SI-ID:	2778090
NUK URN:	URN:SI:UM:DK:A9FC5SYM
Publication date in DKUM:	17.04.2014
Views:	7002
Downloads:	2979
Metadata:
Categories:	FVV
:	Copy citation

Average score:	(0 votes)
Your score:	Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:

Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Secondary language

Language:

English

Abstract:

The diploma thesis presents arguments for and against death penalty. The biggest focus is on arguments for death penalty, which have been presented through different researches, articles, books, etc. The goal of the thesis has been to find the basis for death penalty arguments and if these arguments can be omitted. We have presented using of death penalty through history, the development of the punishment on the Slovenian ground through the time in different periods and rulers, and using of the capital punishment in the last year. We have made a conclusion that death penalty does not increase the society's security even though it disables the delinquent to continue with criminal acts and it works as prevention in this way. However, it is not the only punishment with this effect. Long-term prison punishments disable the delinquent to continue with criminal acts and are in comparison to death penalty much more humane. Death penalty works intimidating only in rear cases against potential delinquents, its effects of general prevention are limited and useful only to a small extent. The states that use death penalty do not have smaller number of severe criminal acts than their neighbours that abolished the death penalty. The argument of economy is totally wrong because death penalty does not save money that the state would have with the delinquents, on the contrary. The expenses that accompany death penalty are extremely high and present a huge financial burden for the state and for the taxpayers, which is clearly presented by the USA with its expenses with the capital punishment. Probably the expenses in the states of the third world such as North Korea, Iran, Somalia, and some others, are much lower and therefore death penalty can be economically justified in the jurisdictions of those states, however, this cannot be a legitimate argument in support of death penalty. The last argument is the argument of righteousness, which is also wrong because nobody has the right to take a life away, even though it is a state. The state in connection with death penalty has improved over the years because almost 100 states have abolished the death penalty for all kinds of crimes, there are also a lot of such states that have death penalty in their legislation, however, they do not execute it in practice.

Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)

0 - 0 / 0

There are no comments!

Back