This paper examines capital punishment from its earliest recorded origins in ancient Babylon through the modern era. It traces the evolution of death penalty laws across civilizations — including ancient Athens, Rome, Britain, and America — and documents the rise of the Abolitionist Movement in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The paper then analyzes opposing perspectives on capital punishment: supporters argue it deters crime and delivers justice, while opponents contend it is inhumane, ineffective as a deterrent, and violates fundamental human rights. Statistical studies and legal philosophy are both considered, and the paper concludes by situating capital punishment within contemporary human rights discourse.
In today's world, the number and severity of crimes committed has increased to such an alarming rate that courts are sometimes left with no alternative but to sentence offenders to capital punishment. Capital punishment can be defined as a sentence of death imposed by a court for the commission of a crime. In legal terms, it is the verdict of death handed down by adjudicators in the second phase of a capital case.
Death penalty laws trace back to the eighteenth century B.C. under the code of King Hammurabi of Babylon, which prescribed the death sentence for twenty-five different crimes. Death sentences also appear in fourteenth-century B.C. Hittite law. In the seventh century B.C., the Draconian Code of Athens made death the sole penalty for every crime. By the fifth century B.C., the Roman Law of the Twelve Tables imposed death penalties carried out by methods of extreme brutality, including crucifixion, drowning, beating to death, and burning alive.
The tenth century A.D. is still associated with the brutality of its execution practices. Hanging became a common method and was practiced widely, particularly in Britain. William the Conqueror attempted to reform this system by prohibiting hanging, but the change did not endure. By the sixteenth century, under the rule of Henry VIII, an estimated 72,000 people were executed. The most common methods of execution included burning, hanging, beheading, and quartering. These punishments were imposed for capital offenses that included crimes such as marrying a Jew and treason.
In Britain, the number of crimes punishable by death continued to grow, and executions increased throughout the seventeenth century. By the 1700s, 222 crimes carried the death sentence, including theft, destruction of trees, and murder. Many juries regarded the death penalty as too harsh for minor offenses and occasionally refused to convict defendants. This resistance eventually prompted reform. In the eighteenth century, 100 of the 222 capital offenses were removed from the list in Britain (Randa, 1997).
America, too, has a significant history with capital punishment. In 1612, various colonies in the United States introduced reforms under which even minor crimes could result in capital punishment. For example, under the New York Colony's Duke's Laws, offenses such as striking one's mother or father or denying the "true God" could result in the death penalty (Randa, 1997).
The widespread use of capital punishment gave rise to the Abolitionist Movement, which sought to eliminate the death penalty for petty offenses throughout the world. Cesare Beccaria's essay of 1767 gave voice to those who opposed such punishments, and his arguments proved influential enough that Austria and Tuscany abolished the death penalty. Scholars in the United States also took steps toward reform. Thomas Jefferson attempted to limit capital punishment in Virginia to crimes of a brutal nature — namely murder and treason — by introducing a bill to that effect. The bill was defeated by a single vote, but it paved the way for others to speak out. Dr. Benjamin Rush, an early advocate of what would later be called the "brutalization effect," continued Jefferson's work and, with assistance from other legal reformers, succeeded in abolishing the death penalty in Pennsylvania for all crimes except murder (Bohm, 1999; Randa, 1997; Schabas, 1997).
These early efforts encouraged broader reform. In the nineteenth century, many states reduced the number of capital offenses and moved executions from public spaces to state prisons. Michigan became the first state to abolish capital punishment for all offenses other than treason. Other states followed, and by the end of the century countries such as Portugal, the Netherlands, and Costa Rica had also embraced abolition (Bohm, 1999; Schabas, 1997). In 1838, further reforms in favor of the Abolitionist Movement were adopted, and by 1963 all mandatory capital punishment laws had been abolished in the United States (Bohm, 1999). During and after the Civil War, however, opposition to capital punishment weakened, and new execution methods — including the electric chair — were introduced (Randa, 1997).
The early twentieth century marked a progressive period of penal reform in the United States. Many states abolished the death penalty entirely, while others limited it to crimes such as treason and murder. Internationally, many countries either abolished capital punishment or restricted it to rarely committed offenses, making the twentieth century a landmark era for the Abolitionist Movement.
Defenders of capital punishment advance either utilitarian or retributive arguments. From a utilitarian perspective, capital punishment is justified if it prevents a convicted criminal from reoffending or deters would-be offenders. From a retributive perspective, it is necessary to achieve justice — the criminal should suffer harm proportional to the harm inflicted on others.
As legal scholar Calabresi argues, "the most obvious deterring justification is the severity of punishment" (19). The punishment must be severe enough to overshadow the crime; therefore, for a brutal crime such as murder, the sentence should not fall short of death (Van Den Haag, 68). Many psychologists add that the deterrent effect need not operate at the conscious level. The theory holds that a potential offender's conscience weighs many factors simultaneously; the death penalty embeds itself in the subconscious as a possible consequence, causing the person's deliberation to tilt away from the criminal act (Guernsey, 70). A public poll found that the majority of respondents believed capital punishment helped to reduce the crime rate (Kuntz, 3).
Statistical research also supports the deterrence argument. Professor Ehrlich's study spanning sixty-six years of data concluded that each execution prevents approximately seven or eight murders (Worsnop, 402). In 1985, Stephen K. Layson, an economist at the University of North Carolina, published a report showing that every execution of a murderer deterred eighteen potential murderers (Guernsey, 68). Although these numbers may appear modest given the volume of murders committed daily in the United States, they become significant when calculated across all executions in a given year (Guernsey, 65).
"Critiques of deterrence, youth, and human dignity"
"Death penalty as a modern human rights concern"
You’re 62% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.