Capital Punishment: Arguments for the Death Penalty in the US

Introduction: The Case for Capital Punishment

Capital punishment (also called the death penalty) is a highly contentious issue, with both advocates and opponents advancing numerous ethical, moral, and economic arguments for and against the continuance of the practice. Supporters of the death penalty argue that it is an effective deterrent against serious crime, conforms to the just principle of retribution for the taking of a human life, and prevents recidivism. Its opponents claim that the deterrent argument is unsustainable, that the death penalty violates a criminal's right to life, that it frequently results in executions of innocent people, and that it discriminates against minorities and the poor.

While respecting the views of committed pacifists who oppose capital punishment, this essay firmly contends that the United States should maintain the death penalty for serious crime. The following sections refute the major arguments against capital punishment and present affirmative points in support of continuing the practice.

The Right to Life Argument Examined

One of the main arguments against the death penalty is that it violates the right to life of every individual. This argument is, to many minds, preposterous — and an insult to the memory of the victims of serious crimes such as premeditated murder and the rape of young children. How can a vicious murderer who has knowingly taken an innocent life and callously disregarded the victim's right to life still lay claim to his own right to life?

A criminal who takes the life of another human being forfeits his own right to live, and society then bears an obligation to judge whether the crime was serious enough to warrant the death penalty. Furthermore, the claim that capital punishment is a cruel relic of ancient times with no place in a modern, civilized society is equally misdirected. A civilized society has a duty to differentiate between the lives of a murderer and his victim — to protect the innocent and the weak against predators, murderers, and rapists.

By instituting capital punishment, a civilized society sends a clear signal to criminals and potential murderers that it values an innocent life above all else. In the words of David Gelernter, a Yale professor: "We execute murderers in order to make a communal proclamation: that murder is intolerable... A deliberate murderer embodies evil so terrible that it defiles the community" (quoted in Jacoby, 1998). In fact, a civilized society brutalizes itself far more by abolishing capital punishment for the most serious crimes than by asserting its resolve not to tolerate murder through the ultimate sanction.

Deterrence: Does the Death Penalty Reduce Murder?

The deterrent argument about capital punishment has been unnecessarily clouded in controversy, largely through the efforts of the anti-death-penalty lobby and a number of inconclusive studies on the subject. For example, abolitionists often argue that some death-penalty states in the United States have higher crime rates than certain non-death-penalty states ("Deterrence," 2006). Such studies ignore the fact that more urbanized states are more likely to have higher crime rates, and less urbanized states are often the ones without capital punishment laws (Lowe, 2006).

The deterrent effect of capital punishment on murders is more accurately reflected in the correlation between the actual number of executions and the murders committed in the United States between 1960 and 2000. Statistics show that in 1960 there were 56 executions and 9,140 murders. Between 1969 and 1980, when only 2 executions occurred, the annual murder rate progressively skyrocketed to 23,040. As the number of executions began to increase after 1980, there was a 44% drop in the murder rate by the year 2000 (Lowe, 2006). Another study by Paul R. Zimmermann, a staff economist at the U.S. Federal Trade Commission conducted in 2002, estimates that a single state execution in the United States "deters approximately fourteen murders per year on average" (Zimmermann, 2002). These statistics clearly indicate a strong deterrent effect of capital punishment on murder rates.

The deterrence effect also finds support in history. An Indian gang of murderers and thieves known as the Thuggees thrived in India for over 350 years, murdering and looting travelers by the thousands, until the British government decided to eliminate the menace through speedy trials and prompt executions. Within a short period the problem was solved, as executions discouraged others from joining the gangs (Lowe, 2006). Currently, the deterrent effect of the death penalty can be seen in countries such as Singapore and Saudi Arabia, which follow a policy of prompt executions for serious crimes such as murder and maintain very low crime rates.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the arguments put forward by the opponents of the death penalty are neither based on solid reasoning nor on verifiable facts. As demonstrated throughout this essay, capital punishment is an effective deterrent against serious crime, is morally justified as retribution for the gravest offenses, and is the only reliable means of preventing murderers from repeating their crimes. It is therefore appropriate that the United States should maintain the death penalty for serious crime.

References

"Deterrence: States Without the Death Penalty Fared Better Over Past Decade." (2006). Death Penalty Information Center. Retrieved September 26, 2006, from

Eddlem, T. R. (2002). "Ten Anti-Death Penalty Fallacies." The New American, 18(11). Retrieved September 26, 2006, from

Jacoby, J. (1998). "The Unjust Logic of Sparing Murderers." Boston Globe, August 1998. Retrieved September 26, 2006, from

Lowe, W. (2006). Pro-Death Penalty Webpage. Retrieved September 26, 2006, from http://www.wesleylowe.com/cp.html

"Statement of Paul G. Cassell before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States House of Representatives." (1993). Retrieved September 26, 2006, from

Zimmermann, P. R. (2002). "State Executions, Deterrence, and the Incidence of Murder." Social Science Research Network. Retrieved September 26, 2006, from