al punishment laws in 1972, executions in the United States were becoming very rare (McKenna and Feingold 172-173).
Berns argues that the death penalty can be seen as consistent with the principles of a constitutional democratic society. Berns notes that our criminal justice institutions impose punishments only as a last resort and with the greatest reluctance (McKenna and Feingold 174). Berns addresses the issue in terms of constitutional arguments, which are arguments based on law and gravitating toward the decision of the Supreme Court that overthrew most death penalty laws in 1972. Berns appears to be examining the issue in depth and then trying to reach a conclusion, as if he had doubts in his own mind that need to be resolved.
Yet, in truth Berns couches his argument in such a way that it seems he has been convinced of the need for a death penalty for some time and that he is now seeking justification for that view. He essentially raises a few of the arguments of opponents of the death penalty and then knocks them down, generally just by refuting them as if the refutation were a simple statement of fact. Abolitio
...