Death Penalty Although it Lasted

Death Penalty

Although it lasted for centuries, capital punishment did not officially become criticized until the recent centuries, with more and more individuals starting to express their disapproval of the process. Almost every nation was accustomed to enforcing death penalty when it was considered to be necessary approximately until the early eighteenth century. The constitutionality, morality, and humanity of capital punishment are certainly debatable, considering the fact that both supporters and those who are against it have generated numerous concepts on the topic. Even though it is difficult to determine whether or not the death penalty should exist in the contemporary society, it is certainly against the "cruel and punishment" stipulation raised in the Eight Amendment.

The U.S.' relationship with the concept of capital punishment is particularly interesting because the country is among the only civilized countries in the world that continues to put into effect this kind of penalty. The death penalty is condemnable primarily because of the fact that it is very probable for an innocent individual to be condemned. Most probably as a result of the certainty that forensic science makes it less possible for investigations to produce flawed data, individuals are influenced in thinking that it is virtually impossible for people to be charged irresponsibly ("Capital Punishment"). In comparison to the U.S., other countries have abolished capital punishment on the grounds that it directly violates human rights and because it is considered to be against the values promoted in modern society. The only instances when death penalties are implemented in a civilized country other than the U.S. are when the reported person has committed terrible crimes. The information available on the subject "reminds us of how many different fora and settings there are in which the morality, the justness, and the desirability and utility of the death penalty are debated" (Geraghty).

In order to understand the reasons why capital punishment continues to be supported by authorities in the U.S., one has to analyze the events that made it possible for the procedure to be possible and in certain cases reluctantly accepted in the country. It is particularly surprising that many nations managed to abolish death penalty in spite of the fact that the general public in those areas was supportive toward the concept of punishing individuals accordingly. Matters are even more confusing when considering that the U.S. is renowned for promoting liberal convictions and for the fact that numerous individuals in the country are against capital punishment. One of the most plausible explanations shedding light on the matter is that individuals in the South have grown accustomed to considering the death penalty as a means of punishing individuals who committed acts that cannot possibly be penalized through other means. It appears that when they are presented with shocking information, the masses are inclined to lose their sense of morality in favor of embracing a feeling of reprisal. Even some of the most ethical individuals can apparently be influenced in expressing immoral thoughts in particular circumstances (Geraghty).

Conditions in the U.S. are critical when concerning the fact that the Supreme Court has expressed its interest in promoting capital punishment. Some of the most influential justices in the country are apparently certain that death penalty should continue to be enforced and that it is very effective in preventing and punishing criminal acts. Moreover, the Supreme Court has made it more difficult for convicts to file appeals and thus less possible for the ones who are innocent to demonstrate it ("Capital Punishment").

While it was once a rather universal process, capital punishment has come to be implemented only in a few countries, with industrialized democracies putting across a general disapproval of the practice. "A few retain capital statutes dealing with extraordinary crimes such as treason, but only Japan, parts of the former Soviet Union, and the United States still carry out death sentences for "ordinary" crimes of violence" (Haines 3). In contrast to how it is in other countries, the anti-death penalty movement in the U.S. is much weaker and thus has little chances to thrive in its mission. The groups in America mostly fail because they concentrate on the immorality and inhumanness of capital punishment. In order for their efforts to be more efficient, they have to focus on highlighting its imprudence and the fact that it is unproductive.

It is especially difficult to criticize capital punishment in a society that is typically known to support it. Most individuals who consider that death penalty is an effective process are normally fueled by two convictions. The first deals with the fact that the punishment is essentially a response to the suffering that the executor inflicted on the victim and the second relates to how the criminal is prevented from performing other criminal acts (Steiker).

In order to provide pro-capital punishment people with a reasonable challenge, one would have to emphasis that if criminals were to be punished in accordance with two of the most common forms of justification for death penalty, authorities would normally have to rape individuals who committed rape, torture people who tortured others, and practically issue a wide range of punishments meant to provide lawbreakers with the exact treatment that they used on their victims. Capital punishment supporters virtually consider that capital punishment is effective and perfectly natural whereas other forms of extreme punishment are immoral and cannot be implemented in the contemporary legal system. People should not support a practice such as capital punishment in a legal system that is recognized for its imperfection.

Certain individuals consider that death penalty is an end to preventing crime, considering that many potential criminals are stopped as a result of the fact that they consider the possible consequences of their actions. However, counter to what most people prefer to think, capital punishment is not a deterrent to crime, as it is simply a cruel form of reprimand that works against humanity and civilization. Punishment does not necessarily have to be inhumane in order to be effective, especially given that cruel penalties are often reported to make criminals even more devoted to commit crime as a response to the immoral system that they are living in. It is particularly worrying that some people believe that they can solve a crime by ending the criminal's life.

Religion is one of the most important elements influencing individuals in being against capital punishment. By relating to religious teachings, people come to understand that particular acts in the contemporary society are much more serious than they appear. "The FBI Uniform Crime Reports for 1990 recorded over 1.8 million crimes of violence, of which 23,440 were cases of murder and non-negligent manslaughter. This is up from 1.25 million crimes of violence in 1983, of which 19,310 were murders.(23) This rise, it should be observed, occurred precisely during a time when capital punishment was being more widely used" (Langan).

Considering that the number of executions in 1990 is incomparable to the number of crimes that occurred during 1990, it is only safe to assume that criminals have not been intimidated as a result of the fact that capital punishment had experienced a notable growth in popularity in the years. Death penalty is not only ineffective as a crime deterrent but it is also harming society through the fact that it influences individuals in considering that a human life is less important and that it can easily be taken away as a means to settle a crime. Capital punishment supporters are thus wrong in claiming that criminals are frightened as a result of considering that they risk death by committing particular criminal activities. Judging from recent data on death penalties and on the increased number of severe crimes, it appears that death penalty is merely a mean of showing the world that the authorities are ruthless with criminals (this actually having little to no effect on perpetrators) (Langan).

Anti-death penalty individuals are presently experiencing distress as a result of the fact that people supporting the act ridicule them by claiming that they are superficial and that they fail to see the importance of an ultimate punishment. With their opponents being much more powerful and capable of winning disputes, anti-death penalty movements are likely to experience defeat in the coming years until they eventually devise an effective strategy to fight for their convictions.