Download pdf
Retention or Abolition of the Death Penalty and Public Opinion on the Death Penalty
- 1 Hubei University of Arts and Science
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
The discussion on the death penalty’s retention or repeal has been going on for a long time, and there are different views on the retention and elimination of the death punishment. Despite the international trend toward abolition, certain countries, like China, Japan, and the United States, continue to use the death sentence, and all three countries have conducted public opinion surveys on the abolition of the death sentence, and public opinion has a certain influence on the death penalty reform. This article will compare the views of Beccaria and Bentham, the representatives of abolitionism, and Kant and Hegel, the representatives of capital punishment retention, review the outcomes of popular opinion surveys on capital punishment in China, the United States, and Japan, analyze the characteristics of public opinion, and discuss the interaction between capital punishment retention and abolition and public opinion. The study about the value of public views in terms of the death sentence reform is of reference significance to the issue of whether the death penalty should be retained or abolished.
Keywords
death penalty repealed or maintained, public opinion survey, characteristics of public opinion, interaction
[1]. Cesare, B.D.B. (1764) An Essay on Crimes and Punishments. Liberty Fund,Inc.
[2]. Berg, M. (2010) Death Penalty and Happiness in States.Was Jeremy Bentham right? Journal of Social Research & Policy, 1(1), 137.
[3]. Immanuel, K. (1965) The Metaphysical of Elements of Justice. Bobbs-Merrill Education Publishing Indianapolis, 104.
[4]. Li, Q.L. (2013) The Complete Works of Immanuel Kant. Renmin University of China Press.
[5]. Georg, W. F. (1821) H. Principles of Philosophy of Law. The Commercial Press.
[6]. Lv, S.L. (1989) A Study of Hegel’s Legal Thought. People’s Public Security University of China Press.
[7]. Jia, Y. (2005) An Investigation Report of the Death Penalty Empirical Research on the View of Capital Punishment. Law Review, 23(3), 20-33.
[8]. Institute of Criminal Law, Wuhan University, and Max Planck Institute of Foreign and International Criminal Law, Germany. (2010) China Death Penalty Attitudes Research Report. Yuanzhao Publishing Co, 11-37.
[9]. Yuan, B. (2009) Investigation and Analysis of Public Opinion on Death Penalty and its Internal Conflict. Legal Studies, 1, 99-112.
[10]. Death Penalty Information Center. (2022) National Polls and Studies. Retrieved from https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/public-opinion-polls/national-polls-and-studies.
[11]. Andreescu, V., Hughes, T. “Tad.” (2020) Public opinion and the death penalty in Japan. Punishment & Society, 22(5),573–595.
[12]. Lu, J.P., Yu, J.Z. (2018) An Analysis of Contemporary Situation,Causes and Value of Japanese Public Opinion on the Death Penalty. Criminal Law Review, 3.
[13]. Toth, Z. (2020) The Public Opinion about the Death Penalty in Hungary and Worldwide: What Do Polls on Capital Punishment Show. Krytyka Prawa. Niezależne studia nad prawem, 12(3), 214-232.
[14]. Zhang, W.K. (2015) The Value of Public Opinion in the Context of Death Penalty Reform. Eastern Forum, 6.
[15]. Wen, X.L. (2014) Public Opinion Considerations in the Application of the Death Penalty. Journal of Hubei University of Police, 27(7), 71-73.
Cite this article
Wang,K. (2023). Retention or Abolition of the Death Penalty and Public Opinion on the Death Penalty. Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media,14,53-58.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Educational Innovation and Philosophical Inquiries
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).