Arguments for and against Capital Punishment - Essay Example

Argumentative Essay About Capital Punishment It is barbaric to think that in an era when compassion and understanding for all things that have life are at the forefront of all discussions and relationships, there are still many who advocate the barbaric idea of the capital punishment as being a just and rightful punishment for certain offenses against humanity. As a people, we are just as criminal as those whom we punish through capital punishment because we tried to correct a wrong (the death of a person by the hands of another) by performing another wrong act (executing the perpetrator). The Law of Moses which is “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”, has this mistaken belief that sadly, most societies across the world still carry today in terms of their belief in justice being served equally and having the punishment fit the crime. Aside from the morally wrong reasons to support capital punishment, there is also the matter of the money that the state must spend on a yearly basis in order to maintain these chambers of doom. Not only do we spend thousands of dollars in maintenance cost for this procedure that could have been better spend elsewhere for the people of the state, but we also spend for the food and lodging of the sentenced death row inmate as he awaits the results of his numerous appeals prior to his execution. These aforementioned reasons are but a few of the well known facts that strongly supports the argument against the further implementation of the capital punishment. However, that is not to say that those who oppose the implementation of the capital punishment do so without any basis. Their arguments are based on a sense of morality and constitutionality. This essay will focus on the arguments of both parties and present factual information in aid of allowing people to decide for themselves as to whether the capital punishment is an effective crime deterrent or not. Information gathered from the Michigan State University and Death Penalty Information Center explains that there is a psychological basis for the use of capital punishment as a crime deterrent. Data they recovered from a 1973 study by Issac Ehrlich (“Arguments for and Against the Death Penalty”, 2000) indicates that ; “... in 1973 Isaac Ehrlich employed a new kind of analysis which produced results showing that for every inmate who was executed, 7 lives were spared because others were deterred from committing murder.” There may have been a time in the development of our society when criminal minds were easily distracted from committing such a heinous offense because of the thought of losing their own lives in the process. However, the criminals of our modern world are far harder to intimidate and seem to have a very good grasp of their crime but not why they did it. That is why there are certain sectors of society that believe instead that criminals caught in the act of a capital punishment offense should instead be given a chance at rehabilitation at a prison like facility instead. As people, we must take into consideration that our prisons were not created in order to have an execution chamber in modern times. Rather, prisons were created for the purpose of keeping the bad elements out of society and containing them in a controlled environment where they can do no harm. The three purposes for having a prison are (2012): “First, prison separates criminals for the safety of the general population. Second, prison is a form of punishment. Third and finally, the punishment of prison is expected to rehabilitate prisoners; so that when prisoners are released from prison, these ex-convicts are less likely to repeat their crimes and risk another prison sentence. .” the logic of prison has always been to help the inmate correct his evil ways. In one word, rehabilitation. Therefore, we should not be executing inmates. That was never the purpose of sending them to jail. There is no sense in trying to rehabilitate a person who is mandated to die at a future date. Thus making the capital punishment an inhumane method of punishment for individual offenders. The supporters of rehabilitation as opposed to the death penalty support the prior because of the inhumane basis of the punishment which, they believe, sometimes oversteps the seriousness of the crime committed. He explains (2012) ; “Killing a person is not humane, even if the criminal is not humane. What is humane is subjective to a person’s upbringing, education, beliefs, and religion. Therefore different people interpret what is humane differently. For instance, some people consider putting a pet asleep is humane if the animal is in great pain, but doing the same thing for a person is often not considered humane. Other people would not kill an animal even for food. In some cultures, mercy killings are honorable.” Although it is true that the definition of humane treatment among human beings is open to interpretation and debate, the reality of the situation is that human beings are vengeful creatures who get a sense of relief from seeing a person who made them suffer a tremendous pain in life suffer the consequences of his actions either by their own hand or by capital punishment law. Think of it this way, the supporters of the death penalty believe that by committing the act of murder, the murderer has forfeited his basic human rights, including the right to continue living (“The Death Penalty -- The Arguments For and Against”, 20111). Using such an argument in support of capital punishment does not make any sense. Murder is murder regardless of who committed the act. There is absolutely no way that capital punishment can be picky about who receives this kind of punishment based on the situation of the crime. If there is an imminent threat on the life of an innocent victim that succeeds, then it is murder. But if the innocent victim manages to fight back and then reverse the tables on his attacker, ending up in killing him, it becomes self-defense and is forgiven by one an all due to extenuating circumstances (Kowal, 2012). There should not be any differentiation between cold blooded murder and killing in self defense. Mainly because regardless of the circumstances, a life was lost and therefore must be avenged. Successfully preventing the attack on an innocent life by taking the life of the attacker should not be applauded by giving him the gift of life. He did not do the world any real favors by killing his attacker. Rather, he left a family with one less member, grieving and seeking justice as well. This is another reason why the capital punishment is simply morally wrong. Lowe (2011) argues that these capital punishment offenders continue their killing spree while within prison grounds. Killing off fellow inmates, security guards, and others whom they deem to have done them wrong. These types of people are obviously beyond rehabilitation and, of they successfully appeal their punishments, as is what happens in some cases, society is placed at a huge disadvantage as the prisoner is released into society without being rehabilitated. This is why Lowe continues to argue that (2011): “... for people who truly value public safety, there is no substitute for the best in its defense which is capital punishment. It not only forever bars the murderer from killing again, it also prevents parole boards and criminal rights activists from giving him the chance to repeat his crime. “ Lowe fails to consider however, that there are certain instances wherein the prison inmate facing capital punishment was actually wrongfully accused of the crime. These people are thrust into a vicious arena where they have very little chance of survival as they do not have the same killer instincts as the vicious criminal they were portrayed to be in the court room. These people suffer the consequences of an imperfect judicial system and sometimes, lose their own innocent lives because of it. Let it not be forgotten that aside from the moral cost of the capital punishment, there is the very real financial cost of implementing the death penalty each time an inmate comes up for execution. There are reports (2012) that the cost of maintaining the capital punishment amounts to at least $2 million per case. On the other hand, life without parole offenders only cost the state around $1 million for 50 years. The cost difference between the two punishments according to the Justice For All Movement data that was gathered by Lowe (2012) shows the total to be anywhere between $1.2 - $3.6 million per death penalty case. The social separation causes severe anxiety within the person who knows that he is in for the rest of his life. A thought that could possibly drive him to madness should he have a delicate psyche. On the other hand, we also have the serious violence that exists in maximum security prisons. These gang related and individual incidents of violence more often than not end up with at least one life term offender bleeding and lifeless on the prison floor. Therefore, by serving up a life term for a capital crime offender, it is almost the same as serving out a death sentence, it just wont cost the state a cent to execute him. Prison society or health reasons will eventually take care of that. Thus leaving everyone with a morally light consciousness knowing that they did not intentionally cause the demise of another being. A sense of even fairer justice can be had by the family of the victim knowing that the person who committed the crime will get his just desserts at the hands of people similar to him in the future as well. The decision as to whether capital punishments are the proper form of punishment for capital offenses is best left up to the judicial bodies of the individual states. A decision that can very well be based on the Fifth Amendment of the American Constitution (Lowe, 2011) that clearly indicates: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. “ In the end, a capital punishment debate always boils down to certain key points such as morality, cost of the procedure, and other alternative treatments for the offenders. There can be no clear winner in this debate because both sides present valid and understandable arguments based on factual information. Sources Kowal, T. (2012). The best argument in favor of capital punishment. The League of Ordinary Gentlemen. Retrieved from http://ordinary- gentlemen.com/timkowal/2012/01/the-best-argument-in-favor-of-capital- punishment/ Lowe, W. (2011). Pro death penalty webpage. wesleylowe.com. Retrieved from http://www.wesleylowe.com/cp.html#constitution N.A. (2000). Arguments for and against the death penalty. Michigan State University and Death Penalty Information Center. Retrieved from http://deathpenaltycurriculum.org/student/c/about/arguments/arguments.PDF N.A. (2011). The death penalty -- the arguments for and against. BBC. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/15007511 Read More