If executions were made public, America would see the torture we put Americans through and be so ashamed by it that they would want the government to abolish the law. People would be more humiliated if they knew that visitors from other countries come to watch Americans kill their own. Americans supposedly take much pride in being the flagship of democracy but yet they kill their own (Winters, 1997).
Kant's law of equal retribution is not a way to guide the punishment of criminals. People would find it morally revolting to "torture torturers, rape rapists, or terrorize terrorists- (Williams, 2000). The government should not sink to the level of the criminal. That is why the government imprisons the criminals. If we did sink to the level of the criminal, it shows that we have no morals. "Government is a teacher, for good or for bad, but government should set the example. I do not believe that government engaging in violence or retribution is the right example. You do not solve violence by committing violence- (Bonner & Fessenden, 2000). There should be a strict punishment for terrible crimes, but that does not mean kill the ones who have killed. How can people respond to killing by killing. "Morality can only be assessed in practice."" Many questions have to be answered before making a final judgment about the morality of the death penalty (Williams, 2000). Society and the government need to realize that the death penalty is morally wrong.
People think that execution is physically painless. Just because it appears painless it does not mean it is. Lets take for instance electrocution, which as been a common type of execution in the twentieth century. This procedure may inflict unnecessary pain, physical violence, and mutilation. This is also a violation of the Eight Amendment (Williams, 2000).
The electricity that is generated by the chair outwits the brain, which is insulated by the skull, and instead passes through the body and out the leg.