Capital punishment: benefits and arguments for the death penalty

Capital Punishment: Justified Justice

The debate of capital punishment will always generate passion. While many opponents will argue the death penalty should be abolished, they fail to offer up any comparable alternatives for the crime for murder. It is a harsh punishment but, in all fairness, the punishment fits the crime. Capital punishment does what the name suggests: it punishes and it removes the notion that one can kill and get away with it. It serves as a deterrent for those contemplating murder and in the end, it brings justice. Capital punishment defends the sanctity of life and until we evolve to the place where murders are no longer a part of our society, we must punish this crime fairly. To know we have removed a murdering criminal from the street is a relief for the living and should be enough for this world.

One argument for the death penalty is the fact that it deters crime. Those enticed by killing someone might think twice if they know their life will be taken as a consequence. Joanna Shepherd explores the history of capital punishment and explains that while many studies produced mixed results, modern economic studies reveal executions "significantly deter murders" (Shepherd). In addition, Wesley Lowe reports when the death penalty was temporarily suspended, the number of murders in the America "skyrocketed from 9,960 to 23,040, a 131% increase" (Lowe) and the murder rate "doubled from 5.1 to 10.2" (Lowe). He goes on the quote Karl Spence of Texas a and M. University, who maintains until "we begin to fight crime in earnest [by using the death penalty], every person who dies at a criminal's hands is a victim of our inaction" (Spence qtd. In Lowe). He is right. When we allow murderers to get away with their crimes, no one benefits except the murderer. However, with capital punishment, everyone benefits and the murderer gets the punishment he or she deserves. To see how the death penalty works, one need only look at Texas, which has exercised capital punishment more that any other state. Their murder rate dropped 60% from 1991 to 1999. In the county where executions are prosecuted the most, the murder rate has decreased 72% since 1982. The numbers speak loud and clear. When criminals know they risk their own lives for murder, they think twice.

Another argument for the death penalty is the simple fact that we do not live in a perfect society. While it is not a pretty fact, the death penalty is a "necessary evil" (Amsterdam qtd. In White 150), according to Anthony Amsterdam. In short, we need it. Our society has not evolved to the point where heinous crimes are no longer committed. Just because something is perceived as bad or evil does not mean we should "not choose to do it without some very good and solid reason of which we are satisfactorily convinced upon sufficient evidence" (150). Everyone knows murder is wrong, that is not the point. The point is keeping more innocent people alive from vicious crimes. To eliminate the death penalty because it hurts or harms someone else is silly. It is a cruel and harsh punishment but it is just and until we rid ourselves of murderers, we will need this type of punishment.

Unfortunately, we live in a society where capital punishment is necessary. While on the one hand we have become increasingly politically correct, we have also become more desensitized to the act of murder. Somehow, the argument for the death penalty gets lost between the extremes of these two mindsets. Politically correct or not, criminals should pay for the crimes they commit. In no society do we see no punishment for crimes. Walter Berns notes that Aristotle taught anger is just and those who kill should be held responsible. We do not live in such a politically correct society that executing justice is perceived as wrong. Justice is never wrong and we as a society should never feel guilt or wrong when we feel angry because someone has been murdered. Anger is a "human passion" (Berns qtd. In White 147), states Berns and murderers are "properly the objects of anger," (148). In some cases, anger is healthy and no one can argue that anger over murder is not justified. Berns understands that angry men are also capable of respecting life. Supporting the death penalty does not make one less human it defends life. Defending life and the sanctity of life is a social responsibility and this is a message that must be sent to all potential murders, says Mufti Zubair Bayat. Murder is the "greatest crime, an open violation of the basic human right to life" (Bayat). The penalty must be extreme, he states, and capital punishment is the "the only way of maintaining the harmonious existence of man on earth along with his fellow beings. No human being, no matter who he may be, has the right to deny another human being this basic right to justice" (Bayat). Until we reach a point where murder is no longer an issue, we must handle that issue seriously. Murders know the death penalty is serious business.