Death Penalty: Social Attitudes and Modern Alternatives

Introduction

The issue of the death penalty raises deep emotions on all sides of the debate. Many feel that the death penalty no longer holds value as a tool for society to prevent heinous crimes. In the past, the prevalence of the death penalty created a measure of deterrence on social behaviors. However, in modern life, there is no longer a measurable deterrence felt in the public consciousness. Like a magnet that is too far from a piece of iron to draw the metal toward it, the distance between the commission of a crime and a death penalty execution has diminished deterrence in all but theoretical discussions.

Many feel that the death penalty contains a measure of justice — that criminals "deserve" to die, and that society "deserves" to see justice served through the death of the convicted. Those who present this argument also do so largely on theoretical terms. Often, those who espouse the death penalty on the basis of justice have their philosophical roots in religious traditions and seek to use sacred texts as the foundation of their position. However, in today's world, a significant portion of society does not see itself as strictly adhering to a particular religious group. Religion is still highly honored in the nation, but religious practices tend to be tempered by social pressures rather than challenge them. As a result, the religious argument for the death penalty is finding fewer supporters.

Modern and postmodern culture questions whether we, as a people, want to be known as a society that must seek retribution in order to feel good about itself. In the case of the death penalty, many in our society have difficulty personally identifying with a system that cannot work toward the rehabilitation of criminals. Since modern social justice theory arose in the early twentieth century, individuals inside and outside of the criminal justice system have worked to develop a system that addresses the root causes of crime and moves people toward rehabilitation, rather than settling for punishment or retribution as socially acceptable goals.

Finally, the rising demands on our prison system to house, feed, and care for an ever-growing prison population have created significant economic pressures. These economic realities have forced those in the criminal justice system to consider carefully the costs and benefits of incarceration.

This paper will evaluate a number of modern factors regarding the death penalty debate. First, we will examine social and psychological theories regarding crime. The theories behind crime serve as a foundation because, if the criminal justice system is to correct or rehabilitate those who are incarcerated, it must have an accurate diagnosis of the problem. In this section, we will consider some of the arguments for the death penalty and some against.

Second, we will examine the issue of deterrence. Deterrence is measured in two different aspects. The first is retribution — society seeks justice by exacting a punishment from the criminal. The second is prevention — society hopes to diminish the occurrence of capital crimes by attaching a high cost to those actions. The issue of deterrence revolves around influencing a person to change a behavioral choice because a high personal cost will be applied to them. In this case, that cost is the loss of their own life.

Finally, we will examine alternative theories. Society must have a plan for addressing criminal behaviors, and the theory of restorative justice is one such framework. Restorative Justice (RJ) insists that the criminal must repay both the individual victim and society for his or her crime. RJ is built on the foundations of repentance and restitution — values that also have roots in religious ethics. By engaging the individual accused of a crime in a process of restitution, RJ believes that both the offender and society as a whole can move toward healing and restoration.