So, in regard to the death penalty, morality can define what justice may to be in a criminal punishment.
Individuals who believe it is morally right to put an individual to death over a horrendous crime support the retentionist argument for the death penalty.
Punishments will happen for individuals committing these crimes, but there are punishments that fit the crimes being committed.
For example, life in prison with no possibility of parole fits the punishment of first degree murder.
Life in prison with no possible chance of parole is enough to deter an individual of a crime who does not want to seek punishment.
Other supporters of the death penalty derive more from government than society.As the death penalty can be a controversial topic is it important to consider all possible factors.The best approach to the death penalty is the principle of human dignity.Individuals who do not agree with the human dignity argument may attempt to argue that the death penalty is an effective consequence because it deters other criminals from committing the crimes.Continuing, it may be argued that the death penalty can show society its moral outrage at unpleasant crimes. Although this seems efficient, an individual who commits a crime already knowing the consequences.No matter the crime committed, one does not forfeit their right to life even if they have taken one.This argument in abolishing the death penalty can agree with tortures should not be tortured, drunk drivers not being hit with a vehicle, and individuals who are accused of arson should not be set on fire.There are many factors that morality support the death penalty.Supports are in favor of taking the life of someone who committed a horrendous crime; a life for a life.The human dignity argument has the idea that human dignity should always be reserved.Human rights are given to an individual when born should be modified when committing crimes but never forfeited.