Capital Punishment Deontology Vs. Consequentialism

Capital Punishment: Deontology vs. consequentialism Subject: Analyze the deontological and consequentialist arguments on both sides of the issue of capital punishment in Gregg v Georgia. In this paper I will present the moral arguments of deontology and consequentialism used to determine whether or not using the death penalty was in fact constitutional. I will present both sides of the arguments and present them in the context of this trial and of similar situations where the arguments could also be applied. In the case of Gregg v Georgia the defending party, Troy Gregg, was charged with armed robbery and murder. Following Georgia due process in capital cases, the trial was in two stages, guilt assessment and a sentencing. The evidence at the guilt trial established that on November 21, 1973, the defendant and a traveling companion, Floyd Allen, were picked up by Fred Simmons and Bob Moore while hitchhiking in north Florida. Another hitchhiker was picked up in Florida, Dennis Weaver, who accompanied them to Atlanta, where he was let out about 11 p. m. A short time later the four men interrupted their journey for a rest stop on the side of the highway. The next day the bodies of Simmons and Moore were discovered in a ditch nearby. Three days later Troy Gregg was found and arrested and subsequently was charged with the crimes for which he was given, after much deliberation, the death penalty. Troy’s case established a precedent and was used as a prime example to reverse