Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 11

Sullivan 1

Whitney Sullivan

English 103

Wilkerson

6 November 2009

A Higher Standard: Abolishing Capital Punishment

Capital punishment leads the pack among prominent issues that blotch the United States’

extensive national resume. Homicide, execution and death describe the coarse action that the

American government takes to punish citizens who have committed capital crimes. The

individual state’s choice to end the life of one of its citizens weighs the country down in its

upward journey as the “model” country. The government is supposed to practice, as well as

represent, the ideals, values, and laws the American people are responsible for carrying out.

However, the government’s acceptance and practice of capital punishment negates this ideal,

because it refuses to obey the law against murder. Nonetheless, certain states continue to

blatantly commit the same crime against its own people. America is a beacon of light for many

of its citizens; however, the country’s use of capital punishment tarnishes this bright light for a

portion of Americans. Capital punishment is governmental murder that should be abolished

because it is economically as well as ethically ignorant and negatively affects the country’s

image.

Increasing unemployment rates, the devaluation of the American dollar, job loss, the

credit crisis and mortgage failures are all consequences of the current American recession.

Despite these financially trying times for the American people, the government still grants

certain states the right to financially abuse the economy through capital punishment. In the

Economist journal article “Saving Lives and Money; The Death Penalty,” the author addresses
Sullivan 2

the fact that capital punishment is proven to be more costly than a life sentence in prison. The

article offers numerous reasons which factor into the high monetary costs of sentencing a person

to death. The time frame from arrest to execution is lengthy and prolonged due to the jury

selection process, the trial itself and the numerous appeals that follow. While this meticulous

process continues over an extended period of time, the state’s bill is simultaneously increasing.

Due to the grave nature of the inmates’ crimes and the status on death row, these prisoners need

to have separate cells and require continual supervision. The specialized training required for the

correctional officers, the large quantity of officers needed to maintain order and the

individualized accommodations all contribute to an exorbitant cost.

Accordingly, the overall expense that the states which practice capital punishment suffer

is astronomical. Between the years of 1978 through 1999, the state of Maryland has had to fork

over 186 million dollars to pay for the costly expenses stemming from their state’s practice of

capital punishment. The burden of capital punishment debts was also felt by the citizens of

Texas. Since 1982, the death penalty has cost tax payers 250 million dollars. New Hampshire,

New Mexico, Kansas and Colorado are all seeking to abolish capital punishment because of

monetary concerns(“Saving Lives and Money; The Death Penalty” 1). These states have come to

the conclusion that the benefit of the death penalty does not parallel the expensive cost. For

example, Kansas is estimated to save 500,000 dollars for every case not seeking the death

penalty. Government officials in Colorado have created a new budget for the money that they

will save by extinguishing the death penalty. The state wants to dedicate the money to an

investigation unit and spend the remaining money on state programs (“Saving Lives and Money;

The Death Penalty” 1). The monetary benefits of extinguishing the death penalty definitely

outweigh the benefits of capital punishment. Not only would the states save millions of dollars,
Sullivan 3

but they could also emulate Colorado’s plan and spend the money addressing other prominent

issues that affect their state.

Similar to the economic aspect of the death penalty, the moral angle ignores the obvious

reasons against this form of punishment. Simply, morals and ethics are words that cannot be

applied to the death penalty because it ignores the basic principles of human life. For one thing,

capital punishment risks ending an innocent person’s life against his/her own will. Every time

someone is sentenced to death row, the government is playing a game of chance with that

person’s life. There are numerous events which prove that an innocent person could possibly

serve time and die for a crime they did not commit. In the article “Injection Reflection; There’s

Wide Support for a Death Penalty, but Those Who Carry It Out Are Increasingly

Uncomfortable” Thomas Evans and other supporting authors explain this idea in their findings.

They reported that advancements in DNA testing in this past decade overturned the verdicts of

200 inmates. Out of those 200, fifteen of them were sentenced to die. This proves that the cases

that many people have against them are not always full proof. Another startling statistic was that

130 people have been exonerated from death row (“Saving Lives and Money; The Death

Penalty” 1). These statistics show that the government took that life or death chance and was

wrong at least 130 times. Another example of the government being dead wrong occurred in

Illinois in 2000. A moratorium was placed on executions because thirteen people on death row

were found innocent and exonerated. In these particular cases, innocent people could have been

killed, which would have transformed the government’s attempt to punish a criminal into a

massacre of innocent citizens.

Conversely, advocates of the death penalty believe that punishing a capital crime convict

by death is a necessary and fit punishment. The hole in their argument is that the United States
Sullivan 4

justice system is not perfect and, therefore, a possibility exists that an innocent person could be

put to death. In her book, Wrongful Capital Convictions and the Legitimacy of the Death

Penalty, Karen Miller analyzes the Legitimation Crisis and Relegitimizing surrounding the death

penalty. Miller uses actual case summaries in which people were exonerated to support her

claims. One particular case involved a man named Frank Lee Smith. On April 18, 1945 Smith

was arrested for murdering 8-year-old Shandra Whitehead. He was accused of stabbing, beating

and sexually assaulting her which led to her death. The basis for his arrest and conviction was an

eyewitness testimony. From 1986 to 1990, Smith consistently applied for appeals and was

constantly denied. He was sentenced to be executed in 1990, but he died of cancer in January

2000. In December of 2000, DNA tests exonerated him and pointed to another person. Frank Lee

Smith is just one of the numerous innocent people punished for a crime they did not commit.

Despite the possibility that a person could be wrongly convicted, certain states still choose to

carry out this extreme and sometimes unjust punishment. Hard to believe, Smith’s depressing life

story is one of the happier endings because he died of natural causes instead of by the deadly

hands of capital punishment.

If everyone convicted of a capital crime were wealthy then they would more than likely

be represented by the best of the best. However, everyone convicted of a capital offense is not

rich and the issue of being able to afford a proper defense is another major concern. When a

person does not have the financial abilities to hire a good attorney the chances of being sentenced

to death increases.
Sullivan 5

“Capital Punishment”: The image


depicts a man on death row
attempting to receive an appeal.

“Capital Punishment” by Mike Luckovich comments on inadequate representation and how it

decreases a person’s chance of being found innocent and acquitted. The cartoon convict looks

helplessly upon the nonchalant judge in hopes that the judge will consider the fact that he did not

receive a fair trial. The electric chair is a prominent image in the cartoon making the statement

that inadequate representation is the death penalty within itself. Overall, the cartoon implies that

being financially unable to afford proper representation and receiving an unfair trial is a recipe

for the death penalty.

In addition to inadequate representation, the issue of the eighth amendment also arises in

the debate over capital punishment. The founding fathers created the Constitution as the

framework and foundation for the basic principles of the United States. The government’s

acceptance of capital punishment infringes upon the eighth amendment of “cruel and unusual

punishment.” The United States has progressed in its method of terminating a prisoner’s life;
Sullivan 6

however, the current method can still not be categorized as humane. There is nothing merciful

about sedating, paralyzing and then stopping the heart of a person (Thomas et al 1). There are

also existing cases in which lethal injection has been the perfect example of “cruel and unusual”

punishment. The London article “The American Way of Death: A Botched Execution in Ohio

Should Quicken the End of Capital Punishment” reported on a failed execution of Romell Broom

who was convicted of rape and murder. Broom’s execution in Ohio was prolonged for two hours

in order for the technicians to find a sturdy vein. Michael Kronewetter’s book Capital

Punishment also divulges the brutal experience that another death row prisoner underwent with

lethal injection. In 1992, it took authorities in Arkansas a whole hour to insert the needle into

Ricky Ray Rector’s vein. During their search for a usable vein, they went to the length of

digging into his arm with a scalpel. After enduring this, it still took an entire nineteen minutes for

him to die.

The experience of these two men fits perfectly with the American Heritage Dictionary of

English Language definition of lethal as extremely harmful; devastating. Regardless of the fact

that the word carries numerous negative and dark connotations, advocates for the death penalty

still believe that it is a humane form of killing a criminal. Other capital punishment supporters

argue that even if the death penalty does violate the eighth amendment, it is still an acceptable

form of punishment because the convict has committed a terrible crime. Their state of mind

focuses on the fact that the convict made someone suffer, so the public should not be concerned

with whether or not the convict suffers. The problem is that the nation is supposed to be above

these convicts. By carrying out the death penalty, these states are succumbing to the same level

of the criminals that they are putting to death. The government is openly contradicting the

amendment with the practice of capital punishment by trying to get even. The life for a life ideal
Sullivan 7

that the death penalty promotes sends the wrong message to the American public and puts the

states on the same playing field as the convicts.

Capital punishment is also an attempt made in vain to reduce capital crimes because there

is not sufficient evidence to even show this punishment deters crime (Kronewetter 18). Against

Capital Punishment: The Anti-Death Penalty Movement in America 1972-1994 explains that the

death penalty is less effective in preventing murders than life in prison with hard labor. For

instance, Texas and Oklahoma are the biggest supporters of the capital punishment, but have the

highest crime rates compared to states that just have life in prison (“Saving Lives and Money;

The Death Penalty” 1). In particular, Texas is the biggest capital punishment hypocrite. They are

responsible for executing more people since 1977 than any other state. However, Houston,

Dallas and Fort Worth have murder rates among the top 25 cities in the country (Kronewetter 5).

Due to this, it is evident that the death penalty is not necessary, especially when life in prison is a

cost efficient and ethical alternative. Justifying the practice of the death penalty because it deters

crime is a starved excuse. Life is considered one of the most precious gifts in the world and

states have the audacity to continue to carry it out even though it still does not reduce the crime

rate and does not bring back the person that was murdered. Some will continue to argue that this

is the most fitting punishment for the crime, even if it does negate the deterrent theory. However,

the death penalty could be the easy way out in a different perspective. It would allow the

criminal’s punishment to be over in a short period of time and he/she would no longer have to

face their crime. If a person is sentenced to life in prison they have to continually think about

what they have done wrong and struggle through the hardships of a maximum security prison.

Punishments are penalties that someone undergoes for committing unacceptable acts. For

example, parents punish their children in order to teach them appropriate behavior and show
Sullivan 8

them what is wrong and right. A parent’s goal behind establishing numerous punishments is to

stop their child from displaying bad behavior. If the punishments that the parents are creating for

their children is not progressing their child from displaying bad behavior, then they search for a

new more effective way to address the situation. The same basic logic can be displayed to capital

punishment. The government uses the death penalty as a sanction against people who have

committed a capital crime. The problem with this form of punishment is that it has proven to be

ineffective. If the death penalty is not clearly fulfilling its goal of reducing crime and murder,

then what is its purpose in the American society? The death penalty does not abate the number of

heinous crimes committed and, therefore, is useless.

A strong cultural value rooted in the hearts of many Americans is the Christian faith.

Advocates continually use the Bible as a backbone to justify capital punishment. They often rely

on the bible verses from Exodus, chapter 21, verses 23 to 25 which states, “And if mischief

follow, then though shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for

foot, burning for burning, and wound for wound, stripe for stripe.” Advocates interpret this and

similar bible verses as religious support for capital punishment. Even though there are excerpts

from the Bible that may support capital punishment, there are just as many Bible verses that

uphold the opposing side of this argument. Verses 38 and 39 from Matthew, chapter five,

specifically counter the previous verse that has become cliché upon the pro-death penalty

community. The verse reads, “Ye have heard that it hath been said, an eye for an eye, and a tooth

for a tooth: But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil; but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right

cheek, turn to him the other also.” This verse not only clearly states that reciprocating an action

is not always the right path to take, but it also turns one of the advocates biblical justifications

paper thin. There are also other numerous bible verses that provide concrete reasoning of why
Sullivan 9

the death penalty should be abolished. One of these verses, located in Exodus, chapter 20, verse

13, stems from the Ten Commandments. The sixth commandment distinctly states that “Thou

shalt not kill.” This verse in the bible holds special precedence because it is not just simply a

verse; it is the law of the Lord. The government’s persistence to carry out the death penalty is a

public transgression and bold deviance against one of the Ten Commandments.

“Death Penalty-US”: The image


created by Glenn Foden depicts a
fictional satan’s view of capital
punishment

In addition, the cartoon “Death Penalty-US” by Glenn Foden makes a statement that the

death penalty is morally wrong because it pleases the devil twice as much. The person who

murders is committing a sin and then the state executes the murderer which is a sin as well. The

government is supposed to lead by example and take the moral high road. This sends conflicting

views to the American public because the states are committing the crime that the government

forbids. The image shows that killing someone, regardless of the reason or how, is murder which

is against the sixth commandment. For many religious Americans this point is extremely

important because the government law does not compare to that of a higher power.
Sullivan 10

If one does not have a strong religious background the fact still remains that taking

another life is unethical. The government simply does not have the right to choose whether

someone should live or die. All that is being accomplished through capital punishment is the

continuance of the circle of violence. Killing the criminal also does not give him/her the chance

to right their wrong. The death penalty leaves no room for retribution, which in the end, would

be more productive than merely killing them. From behind bars, these criminals would have the

opportunity to give back to society in one way or another.

It can be strongly suggested that America is an optimal country. If the world were a high

school and the countries were the students, the United States would the most popular student in

school. America is the nation that many countries aspire to be and opposing countries are jealous

of. However, the reputation of this widely recognized and adored country is negatively affected

by the country’s practice of the death penalty. In the world’s high school, capital punishment is a

“fashion don’t” that America is labeled with. Capital punishment used to be incorporated among

societies in every nation, but as time has progressed, countries have advanced past this inhumane

form of punishment. In fact, America is one of the few big democracies that still carries out the

death penalty (“The American Way of Death: A Botched Execution in Ohio Should Quicken the

End of Capital Punsihment”1). This makes the country seem as if it is stuck in the dark ages

when it comes to its particular choice of disciplinary action. As a member of the United Nations,

it is also unfitting that America still carries out the death penalty because the U.N. seeks to

eventually abolish capital punishment (Kronewetter 137). According to International Standards,

article 3 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, “Everyone has the right to life, liberty,

and the security of person.” The death penalty obviously opposes this declaration because the

“right to life” is stripped away from a person as soon as they are sentenced to death row. This
Sullivan 11

form of disciplinary action also violates points four and nine in the Resolution 1984/50 of the

U.N. Economic and Social Council. The fourth criterion explains that people are only allowed to

be sentenced to death row if they are guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. The high number of

exonerations and cases in which an innocent person has been sentenced to the death penalty

outright breaks this rule. The ninth criterion for capital punishment is that it must be carried out

with minimal suffering (Kronewetter 137-138). The amount of times that an execution has gone

astray combined with the inhumane aspects of lethal injection blatantly disregard this. Capital

punishment is a leech that sucks away America’s credibility for governing its country to other

nations.

George Bernard Shaw in his play Man and Superman stated, “Murder and capital

punishment are not opposites that cancel one another out, but similar that breed their kind”

(Kronewetter 53). The United States use of capital punishment is a lack of bad judgment on the

states that practice it and on the government for continuing to allow it. The benefits that

advocates for capital punishment present are watered down excuses in comparison to the

negatives. The death penalty should be abolished because it is costly, ethically unjust and brings

negative attention to the country. America should be held to a higher standard than just simply

resorting to the same evils that sentenced the convicts with a dose of the “three drug cocktail.”

Вам также может понравиться