Thesis Statement: Although criminals still have the right to live, Death Penalty should be implemented as the capital

punishment for them because it is unjust to take ones life, thus, will provide justice to the victims.

Outline: I. Introduction A. Death Penalty 1. Definition 2. History 3. Countries that im lement Death Penalty !. Crime 1. Definition 2. Crime "ate C. #ustice II. Deterrence A. Definition !. Su C. O ort osition

III. "etri$ution A. Definition !. Su C. O ort osition

I%. Innocence A. Definition

!. Su C. O

ort osition

%. Conclusion

DEATH PENALTY: JUSTICE OR MURDER?

David Joshua V. Medi a

Su!"i##ed #o: M$. J.R.S. Nu e%

Death Penalty is the sentence of e&ecution for murder and some other serious crimes. It may $e rescri$ed $y the Con'ress or any state le'islature for murder and other crimes (Olsen) 2*1+,. The first esta$lished death enalty la-s date as far as the .i'hteenth Century !.C. in the Code of /in' Hammura$i of !a$ylon. Death sentences -ere carried out $y such means of crucifi&ion and the li0e. In !ritain) the num$er of crimes continued to rise throu'h the ne&t centuries. !y the 11**s) 222 crimes -ere unisha$le $y death) -hich includes stealin') lo''in') and the li0e. Ho-e2er) from 1323 to 1331) the death enalty -as eliminated for o2er 1** of the

222 crimes unisha$le $y death ("anda) 1441,. 5urthermore) !ritain influenced America6s use of the death enalty more than any other country did. 7et) la-s re'ardin' the death enalty 2aried from colony to colony. 8nder these la-s) offenses such as stri0in' one6s mother or father) or denyin' the 9od -ere unisha$le $y death ("anda) 1441,. :oreo2er) Dr. !en;amin "ush) a si'ner of the Declaration of Inde endence and founder of Pennsyl2ania Prison Society) challen'ed the $elief that the death enalty ser2ed as deterrent. In fact) "ush -as an early $elie2er in the <$rutali=in' effect.> He after-ards led Pennsyl2ania to $ecome the first state to consider de'rees of murder $ased on cul a$ility. In 114+) Pennsyl2ania re ealed the death enalty for all offenses $ut first?de'ree murder (!ohm) 1444@ "anda) 1441@ Scha$as) 1441,. Ae2ertheless) in 14B*s) u$lic sentiment $e'an to turn a-ay from death enalty. :any allied nations either a$olished or limited this unishment. And in the 8.S.) the num$er of e&ecutions dro ed dramatically. A 9allu oll sho-ed su ort for the death enalty at only +2C (!ohm)

1444,. Crime can $e defined as the $rea0a'e of rules and re'ulations im osed $y any 'o2ernment in a country -hereas the state can unish the criminals. It is not only into some s ecific countries $ut also is at e2ery lace) in e2ery nation. Crime may $e in different ty e either in sha e of ci2il crime or social crime. !ut $oth ha2e $ad results at last and the $ottom line is enalties or unishments. It may $e sto ed $y the la- so that it may not harm eo le and its

rate can $e decreased. There are se2eral reasons for increased crimes in all o2er the -orld. Here is the list of the to ten countries -ith the hi'hest num$er of crimes (as of 2*13,:

"AA/

CO8AT"7

AO. O5 C"I:.S

1 2 3 + B D 1 3 4 1*

8nited States 8nited /in'dom 9ermany 5rance "ussia #a an South Africa Canada Italy India

11)311)213 D)B23)1*D D)B*1)34+ 3)111)3B* 2)4B2)31* 2)3B3)134 2)D33)3+4 2)B1D)413 2)231)BB* 1)1D+)D3*

Ao-adays) crime rate is a threat that each country faces. It is said that society has a direct influence in ma0in' criminals. 9o2ernment im osed many la-s to reduce crime rate to ma0e -orld a $etter lace to li2e in) $ut ma;ority did not find e& ected results. #ustice is currently defined $y most eo le as moral ri'htness and the act of

administerin' the deser2ed unishment or re-ard to those -ho ha2e earned for it (Anonymous) 2*13,. Ho-e2er) it is not ;ust somethin' $ut a thin' that most eo le call for. In the a$o2e definition) ;ustice is ou'ht to $e 'i2en to eo le -ho deser2es it. In addition) eo le -ho committed offenses shall $e unished) hence) ;ustice -ill $e ro2ided. Then) -hat unishment deser2es to $e 'i2en to criminalsE Fhat enalty shall ser2e ;ustice $ut -ill not 2iolate any ri'htsE Althou'h criminals still ha2e the ri'ht to li2e) Death Penalty should $e im lemented as the ca ital unishment for them $ecause it is un;ust to ta0e one6s life) thus) -ill ro2ide ;ustice to the 2ictims. De#e$$e &e.

Society has al-ays used enalty to discoura'e criminals from ille'al $eha2ior. Since society has the utmost concern in re2entin' crime) it has to use the stron'est unishment a2aila$le to fri'hten murder) and that is the death enalty. If murderers are sentenced to death and e&ecution) ossi$le murderers -ill thin0 t-o times $efore 0illin' for the fri'ht of losin' their o-n li2es. 5or years) criminolo'ists analy=ed crime rates to see if they altered the ossi$ility of con2icted murderers $ein' e&ecuted) $ut the results -ere Guestiona$le. Then) in 1413) Isaac .hrlich em loyed a ne- 0ind of e&amination -hich roduced results sho-in' that for e2ery risoner -ho -as e&ecuted) 1 li2es -ere s ared $ecause others -ere deterred from committin' murder. Similar results ha2e $een roduced $y disci les of .hrlich in follo-?u studies.

:oreo2er) e2en if some studies re'ardin' deterrence are uncon2incin') that is only $ecause the death enalty is rarely used and ta0es years $efore an e&ecution is actually acce ted.

Punishments -hich are fast and sure are the $est deterrent. The fact that some states or countries -hich do not use the death enalty ha2e lo-er murder rates than ;urisdictions -hich do cannot $e an e2idence for the failure of deterrence. States -ith hi'h murder rates -ould ha2e e2en hi'her rates if they did not use the death enalty. On the other hand) those -ho thin0 that deterrence ;ustifies the e&ecution of certain offenders tolerate the -ei'ht of ro2in' that the death enalty is a deterrent. The de2astatin' conclusion from years of deterrence studies is that the death enalty is) at $est) no more of a deterrent than a sentence of life in rison. The .hrlich studies ha2e $een usually discredited. In fact) some criminolo'ists) such as Filliam !o-ers of Aorth eastern 8ni2ersity) sustain that the death enalty has the contrary effect: that is) society is $rutali=ed $y the use of the death enalty) and this increases the chance of more murders. .2en most su orters of the death enalty no-

lace less -ei'ht on deterrence as a serious ;ustification for its continued use. States in the

8nited States that do not utili=e the death enalty commonly ha2e lo-er murder rates than states that do) li0e-ise -hen the 8.S. is com ared to countries similar to it. The 8.S.) -ith the death enalty) has a hi'her murder rate than the countries of .uro e or Canada) -hich do not use the death enalty. The death enalty may not $e a deterrent $ecause most eo le -ho cause crimes either do not e& ect to $e cau'ht or do not carefully -ei'h the differences $et-een a ossi$le e&ecution and life in rison $efore they act. Ha$itually) murders are committed in times of sufferin' or an'er) or $y criminals -ho are matter a$users and acted s ontaneously. As someone -ho resided o2er many of Te&asHs e&ecutions) former Te&as Attorney 9eneral #im :atto& has remar0ed) <If) ho-e2er) se2ere unishment can deter crime) then lon'?term im risonment is se2ere enou'h to deter any rational erson from committin' a 2iolent crime (The Case A'ainst the Death Penalty) 1441,.> There is no definite e2idence that the death enalty acts as a $etter deterrent than the ris0 of life im risonment. A re2ie- of the former and resent residents of the countryHs to

educational criminolo'ical societies found that 3+C of these e& erts discarded the conce t that research had confirmed any deterrent effect from the death enalty. Once in rison) those ser2in' life sentences freGuently resol2e into a ha$it and are less of a threat to commit 2iolence than other risoners. :oreo2er) most states no- ha2e a sentence of life -ithout arole. Prisoners -ho are 'i2en this sentence -ill ne2er $e free. Thus) the safety of society can $e 'uaranteed -ithout usin' the death enalty. Aonetheless) .rnest 2an den Haa') a Professor of #uris rudence at 5ordham 8ni2ersity -ho has studied the Guestion of deterrence closely) -rote: <Deterrence is not alto'ether decisi2e

for me either. I -ould fa2or retention of the death enalty as retri$ution e2en if it -ere sho-n that the threat of e&ecution could not deter ros ecti2e murderers not already deterred $y the threat of im risonment. Still) I $elie2e the death enalty) $ecause of its finality) is more feared than im risonment) and deters some ros ecti2e murderers not deterred $y the thou'ht of

im risonment. S arin' the li2es of e2en a fe- ros ecti2e 2ictims $y deterrin' their murderers is more im ortant than reser2in' the li2es of con2icted murderers $ecause of the ossi$ility) or e2en the ro$a$ility) that e&ecutin' them -ould not deter others. Fhereas the life of the 2ictims -ho mi'ht $e sa2ed are 2alua$le) that of the murderer has only ne'ati2e 2alue) $ecause of his crime. Surely the criminal la- is meant to rotect the li2es of otential 2ictims in reference to those of actual murderers.> (Har2ard Ia- "e2ie- Association) 143D, :oreo2er) the death enalty surely deters the murderer -ho is e&ecuted. Strictly

s ea0in') it is a form of inca acitation) similar to the -ay a ro$$er ut in rison is re2ented from ro$$in' on the streets. %iolent murderers ha2e to $e 0illed to re2ent them from doin' so a'ain. !oth as a deterrent and as a form of ermanent inca acitation) the death enalty hel s to re2ent future crime. Re#$i!u#io . "etri$ution is another -ord for re2en'e. Althou'h our first instinct may $e to cause sudden ain on someone -ho offends us) the standards of a mature society demand a more measured res onse. Fhen someone ta0es a life) the $alance of ;ustice is concerned. 8nless that $alance is restored) society surrenders to a rule of $rutality. Only the ta0in' of the murdererHs life restores

the $alance and allo-s society to ro2e realistically that murder is an un$eara$le crime -hich -ill $e unished in 0ind. "etri$ution has its $asis in reli'ious morals) -hich ha2e in the ast sustained that it is a ro riate to ta0e an Jeye for an eyeJ and a life for a life. Ho-e2er) the conce t of an eye for an eye) or a life for a life) is a sim listic one -hich our society has ne2er authori=ed. Fe do not allo- torturin' the torturer) or ra in' the ra ist (Aational Council of Syna'o'ues and the !isho sH Committee for .cumenical and Interreli'ious Affairs of the Aational Conference of Catholic !isho s) 1444,. Ta0in' the life of a murderer is li0ely an uneGual unishment and these defendants are not the -orst offenders $ut only the ones -ith the least resources to rotect themsel2es. 5urthermore) the emotional ur'e for re2en'e is not a sufficient ;ustification for in2o0in' a system of ca ital unishment) -ith all its accom anyin' ro$lems and ris0s (To .nd the Death Penalty) 1444,. The la-s and criminal ;ustice system mi'ht lead us to hi'her rinci les that sho- a com lete res ect for life) e2en the life of a murderer. .ncoura'in' our $asest moti2es of re2en'e) -hich ends in another 0illin') e&tends the chain of 2iolence. Allo-in' e&ecutions sanctions 0illin' as a form of H ay?$ac0.H Ae2ertheless) "o$ert :acy (1441, descri$ed his conce t of the need for retri$ution in one case) JIn 1441) a youn' mother -as rendered hel less and made to -atch as her $a$y -as e&ecuted. The mother -as then mutilated and 0illed. The 0iller should not lie in some rison -ith three meals a day) clean sheet) ca$le T%) family 2isits and endless a eals. 5or ;ustice to re2ail) some 0illers ;ust need to die.J Hence) althou'h the 2ictim and his family cannot $e restored to the status -hich receded the murder) at least an im lementation $rin's end to the murdererHs crime and ensures that the murderer -ill roduce no more 2ictims. I o&e &e.

Society ta0es many ris0s in -hich innocent li2es can $e lost. Ho-e2er) there is no roof that any innocent erson has actually $een e&ecuted since increased safe'uards and a eals -ere added to our death enalty system in the 141*s. .2en if such e&ecutions ha2e occurred) they are 2ery rare. Im risonin' innocent eo le is also -ron') $ut -e cannot em ty the risons $ecause of that minimal ris0. If im ro2ements are needed in the system of re resentation) or in the use of scientific e2idence such as DAA testin') then those reforms should $e instituted. Ho-e2er) the need for reform is not a reason to a$olish the death enalty. Aonetheless) death enalty alone enforces an unchan'ea$le sentence. Once an inmate is e&ecuted) nothin' can $e done to ma0e com ensations if a mista0e has $een done. There is si'nificant e2idence that many mista0es ha2e $een made in sentencin' eo le to death (/o'an) 1444,. Since 1413) at least 121 eo le ha2e $een released from death ro- after e2idence of their innocence occurred. Durin' the same eriod of time) o2er 432 eo le ha2e $een e&ecuted (!ur'er) 1443,. Thus) for e2ery ei'ht eo le e&ecuted) it has found one erson on death ro- -ho ne2er should ha2e $een sentenced. Ae2ertheless) if it can $e ro2en that someone is innocent) then a 'o2ernor -ould surely 'rant clemency and s are the erson. Theoretical claims of innocence are usually ;ust sus endin' strate'ies to ut off the e&ecution as lon' as ossi$le (9assell) 1443,. 9i2en a detailed system of a eals throu'h numerous state and centrali=ed courts) the e&ecution of an innocent indi2idual today is almost im ossi$le. .2en the theoretical e&ecution of an innocent erson can $e ;ustified $ecause the death enalty sa2es li2es $y deterrin' other crimes. Indeed) Death Penalty is a 2ery contro2ersial issue -orld-ide. Ho-e2er) this a er $elie2es that e2en if they still ha2e to e&ercise their o-n ri'hts) Death Penalty should $e

im lemented as the ca ital unishment for criminals in order to ro2ide ;ustice to the 2ictims. 5urthermore) Death Penalty -ill most li0ely decrease the num$er of crimes since it -ill ro2ide deterrence effect to the criminals. :oreo2er) eo le -ill feel unrestricted $ecause criminals -ill $e threatened) at the same time) -ill feel fair) es ecially the 2ictims) $ecause criminals -ill $e ro2ided the most a ro riate unishment. Hence) eo le -ill $e a$le to feel a ;ust and free society -hich most of them ha2e $een lon'in' for. END

Re'e$e &e !edau) H.9. (1441,. The ase Against Death Penalty. Tufts 8ni2ersity. American Ci2il Ii$erties 8nion. Haa') ..%.D. (143D,. The !ltimate Punishment" A Defense.> 5ordham 8ni2ersity. /o'an) 9. (1444) Octo$er,. #nnocence and the Death Penalty. S eech resented in Orlando) 5lorida. Aational Council of Syna'ou'ues and the !isho s6 Committee for .cumenical and Interreli'ious Affairs aof the Aational Conference of Catholic !isho s. (1444,. To $nd the Death Penalty" A %eport of the &ational 'ewish( atholic onsultation.

Po;man) I.P. (1443,. The Death Penalty" )or and Against. 8.S. :ilitary Academy. "o-man K Iittlefield Pu$lishers) Inc.