Running Head: ETHICS OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT 1
ETHICS OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
Ethics Of Capital Punishment (Death Penalty)
Suzy Jabaguryan
West Coast University
English 140
Gabe Jones
07/25/2021
Ethics Of Capital Punishment (Death Penalty)
Introduction
Despite its legality in thirty-six states within the US, capital punishment is arguably the most highly unethical, cruel, and barbaric form of punishment. To kill another human being in the name of the law is a denial of basic human rights, an immeasurable compromise of the democratic system that is the very foundation of this country. Despite this fact, a percentage of Americans still support capital punishment. The opinion of Americans concerning capital punishment had changed dramatically over a century. In 1966, 78% of Americans supported the enactment of the death penalty as a fair punishment for a convict found guilty of murder. By 2020, most Americans (54%) agreed that life imprisonment is a better alternative to capital punishment. However, 46% is still a significant number to support such an unethical practice. In 1970, the US Supreme court agreed to the unconstitutionality of the death penalty. However, under the revised laws, the death penalty is still being issued. In particular, in the Gregg v. Georgia case where the defendant was found guilty of murder and sentenced to death, there was an appeal stating that capital punishment was cruel and gruesome. However, the supreme court ruled against its withdrawal, asserting that capital punishment does not violate the 18th and 14th amendments. The support of the American Citizens and the Supreme court prompt the need to create a different type of narrative. On that emphasizes that punishing a crime with another crime is unethical.
Body paragraph 1
Proponents of capital punishment argue that enacting such an inhumane form of punishment would create deterrence. However, there is no evidence indicating that the death penalty deters crime more effectively compared to long prison sentences. The deterrent effect of the death sentence has no tangible evidence, and statistical analyses from studies suffer grave flaws. As Cole (2006) argues, models such as that of Isaac Erhlich (1975), which are often used to justify murder as a tradeoff of unethical practice, are greatly flawed. The econometrics and assumptions used in his study are highly sensitive, and the results provided were unfounded and have been challenged by other scholars. Furthermore, Statistics in the period where there were increased death sentences suggest no significant change in the percentage of homicides. In specific, in the mid-1990’s death, penalties increased to about 300 per year; however, between 2001 and 2009, the average number of death sentences dropped to about 137 annually. During this time as Bedau, (2003), suggests there has been no significant change in the number of homicides during these periods. Additionally, experts have proven there is no relationship between increased deterrence with increased capital punishment. Radelet and Aker (1996), through a review of America’s top criminologist, proved that the death penalty contributes very little in reducing the rates of violence. Therefore, the death sentence is not only highly unethical but also completely unethical.
Body paragraph 2
Another reason why the death penalty should not be instituted is the expenses that the government could incur. The death penalty will be considerably more expensive than life imprisonment, and from a financial perspective, the death penalty should be ignored. According to Connolly (2018), the death penalty in California has cost the state more than five billion dollars since 1978. Critics argue that some of the main reasons why the death penalty costs are significantly higher are the longer trials where appeals are required when an individual’s life is on the line. Secondly, there is a need for more lawyers and experts regarding such cases on both sides. The complexity of such cases has made them so expensive and thus viewed as a waste of resources by the government. In addition, other states have recorded surreal amounts with the death penalty in Texas costing taxpayers approximately 2.3 million dollars. This figure has been calculated to be more than four times the amount of money required to imprison an individual in a cell for more than four decades. In California, incarcerating an inmate costs the state approximately 81,000 dollars. While these costs are significantly lower than the death penalty, it costs the state approximately 7.2% of its budget. On the other hand, while life imprisonment is the cheaper option, it incurs numerous other risks to the inmates and the prison staff. The lack of a death penalty leads to prison overcrowding, increased violence, and significantly lower personal hygiene, which facilitates a higher rate of spread of disease. This aspect was exposed in 2020, with the spread of the coronavirus and other medical conditions in prisons showing that they are overcrowded and unhealthy for the inmates. While the state may make this decision from a financial perspective, there could be numerous other reparations.
Body paragraph 3
Moreover, the death penalty is violent and cruel. Its brutal nature suggests that the criminal justice system condones and supports violence. Since its independence, America has prided itself to be a beacon of hope and opportunity, a country where people, regardless of their origin, will be treated equally (Sarat, 2018). For most opposers of the death penalty, it is a barbaric act that the government should strive to abolish and erase rather than bring it back. Over the years, the death penalty has evolved from death by firing squad to hanging, electrocution, and lethal injections. These penalties are brutal and should not be performed by a sovereign government like the United States. The death penalty is meant to give a quick and painless ending to a life deemed not worthy. However, lethal injections and gas chambers do not provide a quick death as they are cruel and protracted. These injections have been deemed painful in most cases, where people have died in anguish in the hands of the government meant to protect their rights (Mostyn, 2021). Furthermore, there have been cases of innocent people being executed. One of the best examples is that of Cameron Willingham. Willingham was found guilty of arson murder in Texas in 1992. He was suspected of setting fire to his three children on purpose. In 2004, he was executed. Unfortunately, the Texas Forensic Science Commission eventually discovered that the evidence had been misconstrued and that none of the evidence used against Willingham was reliable. The fire was, as it turned out, completely unintentional (Mostyn, 2021). This story, and many more, show that the death penalty should be abolished because of the many lives lost, yet they could have been saved if they were imprisoned.
Body paragraph 4
The death penalty or capital punishment is inhumane since it is regarded as a direct violation of the human rights code that was set by the international community and other bodies such as ICCPR, a stand that most European countries have taken. Countries like England and France have been the flagships against executing convicts by eliminating the act and adding new punishments that coincide with human rights. In England, Scotland, and Wales, the death sentence for murder was abolished in 1965 (Mostyn, 2021). In 1973, Northern Ireland abolished the death penalty. However, several crimes, including treason, remained punishable by death in Great Britain until 1998. Since the turn of the 21st century, the death penalty has been non-existent, with the government opting for life imprisonment and other correctional activities. In South Africa, following a five-year and four-month moratorium, capital punishment was abolished on June 6, 1995, by a judgment by the Constitutional Court in the case of S v Makwanyane.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the backing of the American people and the Supreme Court has necessitated the development of a new narrative. That underlines the immoral nature of punishing a crime with another one. Even though it is allowed in 36 states across the United States, death punishment is probably the most immoral, harsh, and barbaric form of punishment. Killing another person in the name of the law is a violation of fundamental human rights and an incalculable betrayal of the democratic structure that underpins our country. A small minority of Americans still support the death penalty.
References
Bedau, H. A. (2003). The case against the death penalty. American Civil Liberties Union. Cohen-Cole, E., Durlauf, S., Fagan, J., & Nagin, D. (2006). Re-evaluating the deterrent effect of capital punishment: Model and data uncertainty. Annotation.
Connolly, W. E. (2018). The will, capital punishment, and cultural war. In Cultural Studies and Political Theory (pp. 23-41). Cornell University Press.
Mostyn, B. (2021). Deadly serious: The United Nations, drugs, and capital punishment in the 1980s. International Journal of Drug Policy, 103167.
Radelet, M. L., & Akers, R. L. (1996). Deterrence and the death penalty: The views of the experts. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-), 87(1), 1-16.
Sarat, A. (2018). Killing me softly: Capital punishment and the technologies for taking life. In When the State Kills (pp. 60-84). Princeton University Press