Death Penalty Arguments (1)

8/11/2019 Death Penalty Arguments (1)

1/7

DEATH PENALTY ARGUMENTS: Deterrent or Revenge

(Pros and Cons)INTRODUCTION

What is Capital punishment? Capital punishment is the death penalty. It is used today andwas used in ancient times to punish a variety of offenses. Even the bible advocates death for murderand other crimes like kidnapping and witchcraft.

When the word death penalty is used, it makes yelling and screaming from both sides ofextremist. One side may say deterrence, while the other side may say, but you may execute aninnocent man.

Today, one of the most debated issues in the Criminal Justice System is the issue of capital punishment or the death penalty. Capital punishment was legal until 1972, when the SupremeCourt declared it unconstitutional in Furman v. Georgia stating that it violated the Eight andFourteen Amendments citing cruel and unusual punishment. However, in 1976, the Supreme Courtreversed itself with Gregg v. Georgia and reinstated the death penalty but not all states have thedeath penalty.Thirteen states do not have the death penalty: Alaska, District of Colombia, Hawaii, Iowa, Main,Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, andWisconsin.AGAINST THE DEATH PENALTY (CONS) Death Penalty Fail s to Rehabil itate

What would it accomplish to put someone on death row? The victim is already dead-youcannot bring him back. When the opponents feel fear of death will prevent one from committingmurder, it is not tr ue because most murders are done on the heat of passion when a person cannotthink rationally. Therefore, how can one even have time to think of fear in the heat of passion

(Internet)?ACL U and M ur derers Penni less

The American Civil Liberty Union (ACLU) is working for a moratorium on executions andto put an end to state-sanctioned murder in the United States. They claim it is very disturbing toanyone who values human life.

In the article of the ACLU Evolution Watch, the American Bar Association said the qualityof the legal representation is substantial. Ninety-nine percent of criminal defendants end up

penniless by the time their case is up for appeal. They claim they are treated unfairly. Mostmurderers who do not have any money, receive the death penalty. Those who live in counties pro-death penalty are more likely to receive the death penalty. (Internet).Death Penalty F ail ed as a Deterrent

Some criminologist claim they have statistically proven that when an execution is publicized, more murders occur in the day and weeks that follow. A good example is in the Linbergkidnapping. A number of states adopted the death penalty for crime like this, but figures showedkidnapping increased. Publicity may encourage crime instead of preventing it (McClellan, G.,1961).

Death is one penalty which makes error irreversible and the chance of error isinescapable when based on human judgment . On the contrary, sometimes defendants insist on


2/7

execution. They feel it is an act of kindness to them. The argument here is - Is life imprisonment acrueler fate? Is there evidence supporting the usefulness of the death penalty securing the life ofthe citizens (McClellan, G. 1961)?

Does the death penalty give increased protection against being murdered? This argumentfor continuation of the death penalty is most likely a deterrent, but it has failed as a

deterrent. There is no clear evidence because empirical studies done in the 50s by ProfessorThorsten Sellin, (sociologist) did not give support to deterrence (McClellan, G., 1961).Does not Discourage Cr ime

It is noted that we need extreme penalty as a deterrent to crime. This could be a strongargument if it could be proved that the death penalty discourages murderers and kidnappers. Thereis strong evidence that the death penalty does not discourage crime at all (McClellan, G., 1961).Grant McClellan (1961) claims:

In 1958 the10 states that had the fewest murders fewerthan two a year per 100,000 population -were New HampshireIowa, Minnesota, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Wisconsin,Rhode Island, Utah, North Dakota and Washington. Four of

these 10 states had abolished the death penalty.

The 10 states, which had the most murderers from eight tofourteen killings per100,000 population were Nevada,

Alabama, Georgia, Arkansas, and Virginia - all of themenforce the death penalty. The fact is that fear of thedeath penalty has never served to reduce the crime rate (p. 40).

Conviction of the I nnocent Occurs The states that have the death penalty should be free of murder, but those states have the

most murders, and the states that abolished the death penalty has less. Conviction of the innocent

does occur and death makes a miscarriage of justice irrevocable. Two states Maine and RhodeIsland abolished the death penalty because of public shame and remorse after they discovered theyexecuted some innocent men.

F ear of D eath Does not Reduce Crime.

The fear of the death penalty has never reduced crime. Through most of historyexecutions were public and brutal. Some criminals were even crushed to death slowly under heavyweight. Crime was more common at that time than it is now. Evidence shows execution does notact as a deterrent to capital punishment.M otives for D eath Penalty - Revenge

According to Grant McClellan (1961), the motives for the death penalty may be forrevenge. Legal vengeance solidifies social solidarity against law breakers and is the alternative tothe private revenge of those who feel harmed.FOR THE DEATH PENALTY (PROS) Threat of D eath Penalty Rate of H omicide Decreases

Frank Carrington (1978) states- is there any way one can tell whether the death penaltydeters murders from killing? There is no way one can tell whether the death penalty deters


3/7

murderers from killing. The argument goes on that proponents of capital punishments should nothave to bear the burden of proving deterrence by a reasonable doubt. Nor should the abolitionisthave to prove deterrence by a reasonable doubt -neither side would be able to anyway.

Frank Carrington (1978) claims common sense supports the inference that if, the threat ofthe death penalty decreases, the rate of murders increases than it may be true. But if the threat had

increased, the homicide rate may decrease.Justice Stewart held in the Supreme Court in Gregg v. Georgia:

Although some of the studies suggest that the death penalty may not function as a significantly greater

deterrent than lesser penalties, there is no convincingempirical evidence supporting or refuting this view.

We may nevertheless assume safely there are murders,such as those who act in passion, for whom the threat of

death has little or no deterrent effect. But for many others,the death penalty undoubtedly, is a significant deterrent.

There are carefully contemplated murders, such as murderfor hire, where the possible penalty of death may well enterthe cold calculus that precedes the decision to act

( as cited in Carrington, 1978. p. 87).

J. Edgar Hoover, late director of Federal Bureau of Investigations, asks thefollowing questions: Have you ever thought about how many criminals escape

punishment, and yet, the victims never have a chance to do that? Are crime victims in the UnitedStates today the forgotten people of our time? Do they receive full measure of justice (as cited in

Isenberg, 1977, p. 129)?A criminal on death row has a chance to prepare his death, make a will, and make his last

statements, etc. while some victims can never do it. There are many other crimes where people are injured by stabbing, rape, theft, etc. To some degree at least, the victims right tofreedom and pursuit of happiness is violated.

When the assailant is apprehended and charged, he has the power of the judicial processwho protects his constitutional rights. What about the victim? The assailant may have compassionfrom investigating officers, families and friends. Furthermore, the criminal may have organizedcampaigns of propaganda to build sympathy for him as if he is the one who has been sinnedagainst. These false claims are publicized, for no reason, hence, protecting the criminal (Isenberg,I., 1977).

The former Theodore L. Sendak, Attorney General of Indiana delivered a speech to Lawenforcement officials in Northern Indiana on May 12, 1971 (as cited in Isenberg, 1977):

Our system of criminal law is to minimize human suffering by works or order primarily to forestallviolence or aggression. In the question of the death

penalty, we must ask ourselves which action willserve the true humanitarian purpose of criminal law.


4/7

We should weigh the death of the convicted murdersagainst the loss of life of his victims and the possibilityof potential victims to murder (p. 129)

In arguments of the death penalty, there are two lives to think about. Too much emphasis is placed on the convicted murderer, the one being executed, and the victim is all forgotten.

Crime Rate I ncreases Millions are being killed and will be killed because our justice system is not

working. Millions have already been killed and will be killed every year. According to Time Magazine, there are 2,000,000 people beaten in the United States. Some are knifed, shot, orassaulted (Internet).

Crime growth has been going up in the past because of too much leniency going hand inhand with the increased rate of people being victimized. There are many loop holes devised foroffenders, and because of that crime rate has increased drastically. Between l960 to 1968 crimerate increased 11 times. More and more people are being murdered, raped, assaulted, kidnapped,and robbed, etc. (Isenberg, I., 1997).F ree Wil l

When you commit a felony, it is a matter of free will. No one is compelled to commitarmed robbery, murder, or rape. The average citizen does not have a mind or intentions to becomea killer or being falsely accused of murder. What he is worried about is being a victim.Deterrent i n 27 States

Opponents argue that there is no deterrent effect by using the death penalty. According toBaily, who did a study from l967 to l968, the death penalty was a deterrentin 27 states. When there was a moratorium on Capital Punishment in the United States, the studyshowed murder rates increased by 100%. The study also reviewed 14 nations who abolished thedeath penalty. It (the study) claimed murder increased by 7% from five years before the abolition

period to the five years after the abolition (Internet).

Studies were made by Professor Isaac Erlich between the period of 1933 and 1969. Heconcluded An additional execution per year may have resulted in fewer murders (Bedau, 1982, p.323).

The number of years on the average spent in death row is 10 years. It is known, with all theappeals, the death penalty is not swift! In fact, most murderers feel they most likely will never be

put to death. If the death penalty was swift and inevitable, there certainly would be a decrease inhomicide rates. (Internet).Death Feared

Most people have a natural fear of death- its a trait man have to think about what willhappen before we act. If we dont think about it consciously, we will think about itunconsciously. Think- if every murderer who killed someone died instantly, the homicide ratewould be very low because no one likes to die. We cannot do this, but if the Justice system canmake it more swift and severe, we could change the laws to make capital punishment faster andmake appeals a shorter process. The death penalty is important because it could save the lives ofthousands of potential victims who are at stake (Bedau, H., 1982).

In a foot note Bedau (1982) cites, Actually being dead is no different from not being born,a (non) experience we all had before being born. But death is not realized. The process of dying


5/7

which is a different matter is usually confused with it. In turn, dying is feared because death isexpected, even though death is feared because it is confused with dying (p. 338).

Death is an experience that cannot be experienced and ends all experience. Because it isunknown as it is certain, death is universally feared. The life of a man should be sacred to eachother (Bedau, H., 1982, p. 330).

I nnocent E xecuted - no Proof Opponents claim lots of innocent man are wrongly executed. There has never been any

proof of an innocent man being executed!! A study by Bedau-Radlet claimed there were 22 caseswhere the defendant have been wrongly executed. However, this study is verycontroversial. Studies like Markman and Cassell find that the methodology was flawed in l2cases. There was no substantial evidence of guilt, and no evidence of innocence. Moreover, our

judicial system takes extra precautions to be sure the innocent and their rights are protected. Mostlikely an innocent person would not be executed (Internet).Death Penalty Saves L ives

The question is whether or not execution of an innocent person is strong enough to abolishthe death penalty. Remember, the death penalty saves lives. Repeat murders are eliminated andforeseeable murders are deterred. You must consider the victim as well as the defendant.Hugo Bedau (1982) claims:

The execution of the innocent believed guilty is amiscarriage of justice that must be opposed wheneverdetected. But such miscarriage of justice do notwarrant abolition at the death penalty. Unless themoral drawbacks of an activity practice, which includethe possible death of innocent lives that might be saved

by it, the activity is warranted. Most human activities likemedicine, manufacturing, automobile, and air traffic, sports,

not to mention wars and revolutions, cause death ofinnocent bystanders. Nevertheless, advantages outweighthe disadvantages, human activities including the penal

system with all its punishments are morally justified ( p. 323).

Wesley Lowe states, As for the penal system, accidentally executing an innocent person, Imust point out that in this imperfect world, citizens are required to take certain risks in exchange forsafety. He says we risk dying in an accident when we drive a car, and it is acceptable. Therefore,risking that someone might be wrongfully executed is worth saving thousands of innocent peoplewho may be the next victim of murder (Internet).Death Penalty - Ri ght to L ive

Opponents say the State is like a murder himself. The argument here is, if execution ismurder, than killing someone in war is murder. Our country should stop fighting wars. On thecontrary, is it necessary to protect the rights of a group of people. Hence, the death penalty is vitalto protect a persons right to live! Is arresting someone same as kidnapping someone? In the same,executing someone is not murder, it is punishment by society for a deserving criminal.Bi ble Quotes


6/7

Huggo A. Bedau (1982) states one popular objection to Capital punishment is that itgratifies the desire for revenge regarding as unworthy. The bible quotes the Lord declaringVengeance is mine (Romans 12:19). He thus legitimized vengeance and reserved it toHimself. However, the Bible also enjoins, The murderer shall surely be put to death (Numbers 35:16 -18), recognizing that the death penalty can be warranted whatever the

motive. Religious tradition certainly suggest no less (p. 330).All religions believe having life is sacred. If we deprive someone else life, he only suffers

minor inconvenience; hence, we cheapen human life this is where we are at today.Death Penalty D eter rent Ef fect

If we do not know whether the death penalty will deter others, we will be confronted withtwo uncertainties . If we have the death penalty and achieve no deterrent effect, than, the life ofconvicted murderers has been expended in vain (from a deterrent point of view) here is a netloss. If we have the death sentence, and deter future murderers, we spared the lives of futurevictims-(the prospective murderers gain, too; they are spared punishment because they weredeterred). In this case, the death penalty is a gain, unless the convicted murderer is valued morehighly than that of the unknown victim, or victims (Carrington, F., l978).

Capital Punishment is not excessive, unnecessary punishment, for those who knowinglyand intentionally commits murder in premeditation, to take lives of others. Even though capital

punishment is not used so often, it still is a threat to the criminal.Justice

Justice requires punishing the guilty even if only some can be punished and sparing theinnocent, even if all are not spared. Morally, justice must always be preferred to equality. Justicecannot ever permit sparing some guilty person, or punishing some innocent ones, for the sake ofequality because others have been spared or punished. In practice, penalties could never beapplied if we insisted that they can be inflicted on only a guilty person unless we are able to makesure that they are equally applied to all other guilty persons. Anyone familiar with the law

enforcement knows that punishments can be inflicted on ly on an unavoidable shudder selection ofthe guilty (Bedau, H., 1977).

Irwin Isenberg (1977) said, when you kill a man with premeditation, you do somethingdifferent than stealing from him. I favor the death penalty as a matter of justice and humandignity even apart from deterrence. The penalty must be appropriate to the seriousness of the crime(p. 135).Lif e is Sacred

In an interview with Professor van den Haag, a psychoanalyst and adjunct professor at NewYork University, was questioned, Why do you favor the death penalty? His answer was thatthe Federal prison had a man sentenced to Life who, since he has been in prison committed threemore murders on three separate occasions .They were prison guards and inmates. Theres no more

punishment he can receive, therefore, in many cases, the death penalty is the only penalty that candeter. He went on saying I hold life sacred, and because I hold it sacred, I feel that anyone whotakes some ones life should know that thereby he forsakes his own and does not just suffer aninconvenience about being put into prison for sometime (as cited in Isenberg, 1977, p. 135)An E ye for an Eye

Some people argue that the capital punishment tends to brutalize and disregardssociety. Do you agree? Some people say the that penalty is legalized murder because it is like an


7/7

eye for an eye. The difference between punishment and the crime is that one is legalized and theother is not! People are more brutalized by what they see on T.V. daily. People are not brutalized

by punishments they are brutalized by our failure to serious punish, the brutal acts.Could the same effect be achieved by putting the criminal in prison for life? Life in

prison means in six months the parole board can release the man to 12 years in some states. But

even if it were real life imprisonment, its deterrent effect will never be as great as that of the death penalty. The death penalty is the only actually irrevocable penalty. Because of that, it is the onethat people fear the most (Isenberg, I., 1977).

The framers of the constitution clearly believed that Capital punishment was an acceptablemess of protecting society form wicked dissolute men Thomas Jefferson liked to talk about it(Carrington, F., 1978).CONCLUSION

My research on issues on the death penalty is one of the most debatable in the criminal justice system. Today, there are many pros and cons to this death penalty issues. However, if people weigh the arguments properly, and have empathy for the victims, they will be more inclinedto favor capital punishment. As a matter of fact, most people in the U.S. today are in favor ofit. But we need more states to enforce the death penalty.

As you may have read in the arguments, the death penalty help to curtail future murderers,thus, we can save more lives. The chances of murdering an innocent man is very minute.

Documents

Death Penalty Arguments (1)