Death Penalty One of Society's Significant Issues

Death penalty is one of society's most significant issues. It has been discussed and debated for many years, and there are always pros and cons to the issue. However, whether the death penalty is effective and how it is addressed as a matter of public policy is something that needs to be more closely scrutinized. Moral issues and ethical issues are at the forefront of many death penalty discussions, but taxpayer cost and other concerns hover closely in the background, as well.

The purpose here is not to say whether the death penalty is right or wrong from a moral or spiritual standpoint, but to examine it, based on pros and cons, from the standpoint of whether it works for its intended purpose and is a just representation of human justice. The issue will be introduced, the pros and cons of it will be discussed, and conclusions will be drawn based on that information, providing a better idea of whether the death penalty works as public policy and if it is deemed effective as a deterrent for violent crime.

The Death Penalty

Introduction

Capital punishment, which some also call the death penalty, has been around in society for hundreds of years. Ever since it began, there have been arguments as to whether it is morally right, and as to whether it actually deters crime. Some believe that the prospect of being killed often prevents criminals from undertaking violent acts. Others believe exactly the opposite, stating that those who undertake violent crimes are driven to do so for many reasons, and whether they have the chance of being killed or not will not prevent them from doing what they feel they must do.

Some serial murderers and other violent people believe that they will never be caught. Others think that they are doing God's work, or they cite other 'significant' reasons for the killings and violent acts that they partake in. Sometimes this is due to mental disorders, but there are other reasons that people undertake acts of this nature. Regardless of these reasons, however, violent acts can and do occur and whether these people should be killed for their crimes remains a hotly discussed issue.

On one side of the discussion, there are those who believe that killing is morally and ethically wrong, whether it is the murderer and his victims or the government and the murderer. The ethical dilemmas that are faced by this issue are not designed to be discussed here. They are significant and worthy of discussion and thought, but the scope of this paper does not allow for space to discussion the ethical issues that involve capital punishment as it pertains to violent people and their reasons for their actions.

The purpose of this paper is to leave those issues aside and determine whether there is a basis of truth in the statement that capital punishment deters violent criminals. This statement is used by many who believe in capital punishment, and they argue that these criminals will not be able to do any more harm, which is certainly true, and not a question for discussion. What is debatable, however, is whether the idea of capital punishment affects those who might undertake violent crimes, and whether it prevents them from doing so. There are many that believe this, and others that insist that there is little to no effect.

Both sides of the argument will be addressed here, so that conclusions can be drawn from the information presented that will hopefully shed some light on the discussion and determine which side is correct. There is, however, seemingly much more information available that is against capital punishment than for it. It is also possible that a determination will not be able to be made due to the fact that there are so many issues and beliefs that surround each side of the issue, and statistics can be made to show many things, depending on who is utilizing them and how the numbers are manipulated. It is for this reason that statistics will not play a large role in the scope of this paper, as numbers often vary.

Argument for Capital Punishment

Those who argue for capital punishment state that, not only does it keep the individual in question from undertaking any more violent acts, but it also serves as a lesson for those who are considering these types of acts in the future. It is not only the United States that has this problem, as many other countries are also concerned about crime rates. In some other countries there are people that feel that doing away with capital punishment offers no deterrent for those who would rape and murder innocent people for some reason, or sometimes for no real reason at all (Bayat, 1999).

It is believed that the criminal element that is aware of capital punishment will spend more time considering whether the act they are thinking of undertaking is worth the price that they might ultimately have to pay. The opinion is that many criminals will feel that risking their life for the violent act is not worth the price, and they will refrain from undertaking these kinds of crimes. Few people, even criminals, have a death wish, and it is believed that this lack of desire for their own death will keep them from causing the deaths of others. Despite opposition from those who believe capital punishment should be prevented, some statistics do show that the number of murders does rise when capital punishment is not in force, and this number falls when capital punishment is reinstated (Johansen, 1998).

Another point of this argument is that capital punishment brings closure for the victims of the families who have lost loved ones. There is apparently a satisfaction, at least for some, upon seeing these people give up their life at the hands of the government. The chapter of their lives that dealt with that individual has come to an end, and they can finally feel that they can move on with their lives (Radelet & Akers, 1996). This is somewhat related to violent crime, in that there is always the possibility that survivors who have lost loved ones would consider taking their vengeance out on others because of their pain and sorrow, and this could lead to even more violent crimes. Violent criminals who are paroled also run the risk of being killed by those who know what they did and who believe that they should have died. This creates more violent acts in society and more problems with how to punish these people. Having capital punishment for violent crimes often prevents this.

To summarize, the main point of the argument for capital punishment is that crime will go down because of the fear of punishment. This is the belief of those who advocate capital punishment for all violent crimes, and all of the information to the contrary does not appear to change this opinion.

Argument Against Capital Punishment

There are many different arguments against capital punishment, and some of these come from law enforcement. Polls of police chiefs in many areas of the country indicate that a large majority of them believe that capital punishment is no deterrent to violent crime. It ranks last on their lists of how they should go about reducing violent crime, and studies have shown that it is no better at reducing crime than the possibility of life in prison without any chance of parole (Cook, 1999). This is interesting, in the face of the argument that capital punishment reduces the amount of violent crimes that are undertaken. Studies have also shown that, contrary to the popular opinion that capital punishment brings closure, most people do not feel that watching someone else die helps them to move on in any way. Sometimes it seems to profane the name of the lost loved one by associating yet another death with it. The death of the loved one is painful enough without adding to it (Cook, 1999).

Mainly, opponents of capital punishment argue that (Policy, 2003):

those contemplating criminal activities do not rationally weigh the benefits and costs of their actions, the costs associated with obtaining a death penalty conviction are larger than the costs associated with providing lifetime imprisonment, in a world of imperfect information, innocent people may be convicted and executed before exonerating information is discovered, and capital punishment has disproportionately been applied in cases in which the defendant is nonwhite or the victim is white.

There are several effective arguments against capital punishment, including the fact that some people have been executed, and the government has later discovered their innocence. There is not much to be done at that point, and instead of deterring violent crime, it makes capital punishment seem unjust and unfair. It also draws into question once again whether capital punishment is such a good idea, since it can sometimes be used incorrectly and innocent people are made to suffer for the mistakes of the police, prosecutors, and government. It would seem that many criminals would find this more amusing than frightening. They do not take their chances of being caught and subjected to capital punishment seriously enough to be frightened by the penalty like many assume they will be (van den Haag, 2001).

According to some who believe in God and feel that capital punishment is acceptable under the scriptures, there is one main point, which is that "This is not an issue that may be measured accurately in terms of statistics. No one can ever know how many potential murderers have refrained from taking human life due to their fear of prosecution, conviction, and ultimate execution" (Jackson, 2003). It is also questioned during this same argument, though, by those who conclude that capital punishment is not a deterrent to violent crime, whether they should also be able to conclude that prison is not a deterrent either, since people seem to keep undertaking crimes, whether or not they think they will go to jail.

Another concern over capital punishment and violent crime is the issue of the mentally handicapped. They, along with juveniles, also undertake violent crimes on occasion. These mentally handicapped people, not to be confused with mentally disturbed or insane people, often have low IQs and do not realize what they have done. Capital punishment in their cases is not any deterrent. They do not even realize what they have done. One mentally handicapped man actually asked the jailers to save his dessert for him so that he could eat it after his execution. It was clear that he did not understand what the execution was about, no more than he understood the crime that he had undertaken. Executing people like this does nothing for society. Many people find it cruel, and even if it is not, it is certainly senseless. There are no significant lessons about not undertaking crimes that are learned by executing someone who is mentally handicapped (Reforms, 2002).

The same is true for juvenile offenders. Some juveniles who are convicted of violent crimes are locked away in prison until such time as they are old enough to be executed, which really does not teach juveniles anything valuable about capital punishment or avoidance of violent crime. More often than not, these juveniles are not executed, and most juveniles know that they will not receive capital punishment, even if they are tried as adults, so they are not deterred by the possibility (Radelet & Akers, 1996).

There are other arguments, but the most effective argument against capital punishment as a deterrent for violent crime appears to be the fact that crime has not gone down simply because capital punishment is out there (Death, 2000). States that have it do not have lower crime rates on average than states that do not have it, and that would indicate that capital punishment in and of itself is not preventing people from undertaking violent acts (Ikramullah, 2003).

Conclusion

Crime, including violent crime, has been with society virtually since the beginning, and it will remain with society until it ends. Nothing will prevent some people from undertaking violent acts, and capital punishment does not appear to be the answer. Sometimes, innocent lives are lost to this process, and many times the families of the victims do not experience the kind of closure that one would hope for simply because the offender has been executed. Since it would appear that even law enforcement does not see capital punishment as an answer to the problems of crime in society, one wonders why it is allowed to continue.

It is possible, however, that capital punishment would be a deterrent if it were used more swiftly and more often. Many people who are sentenced to death spend years in prison appealing their conviction and appealing their sentence, and this is a large waste of taxpayer money, as well as a huge burden on the court system. Those who are guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt often wait a long time for their sentence to be carried out. Even when DNA evidence shows that they were the guilty party, the execution is still not swiftly carried out, and this allows many criminals to find some way to avoid it.