capital punishment9, Miscellaneous, College Term Papers.com


		Data Bases
		• Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism?

		Links
		• Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com

		Free Essays
		• Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • My Term Papers • Get Free Essays • Essay World • Planet Papers

Search Lots of Essays

Back to Subjects - Miscellaneous

Capital Punishment9

Capital Punishment9 Capital Punishment: Right or Wrong? All punishment is based on the same simple truth: there must be a penalty for wrongdoing. In order for there to be punishment, there must be both a wrongdoer and an authority to inflict the penalty. In a family, when you break a rule, the punishment is handed out by the parents. In society, punishment for crime is carried out by a criminal justice system (police, courts, and prisons). In both systems, one solid rule of thumb can be derived: if you do something wrong, you will pay for it Our topic, capital punishment, otherwise known as death, is considered to be the most severe penalty society can inflict. By doing so, it deprives the criminal of his or her futures, hopes and dreams, while at the same time taking all that is precious away. Because the death penalty is ultimate and final, it brings about much controversy. Some agree that it is immoral, brutal, gruesome and primitive for a ruling body to use death as a punishment for deviance in any degree; no matter how harsh the crime. These people are known as abolitionists. On the other hand, the supporters of the death penalty say that it is only justice that the death penalty be carried out for capital crimes, such as murder, rape, and Putting all theology aside, these views can be explained, to the point of what fuels them. This can be accomplished by looking into the hard-core issues that revolve around this seemingly never ending debate, giving examples of real life cases, and analyzing scientific numbers. Each and all of these steps can answer the following questions: (1) Is there inequality in the courtroom?, (2) Does the death penalty deter crime?, and (3) What are the stands on morality and justice? Is there inequality in the courtroom? Most all of the societies and civilizations throughout time have used the death penalty as a punishment for all kinds of social, criminal, and political wrongdoings. In ancient Greece, Egypt, and Syria, citizens were executed for a variety of things ranging from perjury to murder. Roman and Mosaic law of antiquity also endorsed the retaliating rule of “an eye for and eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, burn for burn, and life for life.” Often the trials through which these convicted criminals were put over consisted of a group of witness, a mediator, and the plaintiff. After a commonly unfair trial, the defendant was put to death This comes to the main focus of this issue; court inequality. Those that oppose the death penalty make accusations that those of racial minorities are more likely to be found guilty of capital crimes than those that are white. Furthermore, evidence of this happening is in In a 1986 study, conducted by Dr. Barry Nakell and Dr. Kenneth Hardy of Temple University, they discovered remarkable conclusions in their study on racial inequality in capital cases. In their studies Nakell said: “When the case was submitted to the jury, if the defendant was black instead of white, he would, at best, face the same prospect that the jury would deliberate his case at first degree murder. At worst, the black defendant would be fifty-six times as likely to face a first degree murder deliberation than a white defendant” (Nakell and Hardy 139). However, later in Nakell and Hardy’s study on the sentencing process, their findings were quite the opposite. He stated: “At sentencing, the key factor was again the race of the defendant. Nevertheless, if the defendant was white instead of black, the defendant was six times as apt to receive the death sentence” (Nakell and Hardy Though Nakell and Hardy’s findings do support the anti-death penalty view of inequality in the conviction stage, their sentencing evidence does agree with pro-death arguments. Still, the question must be posed: are these conclusions to the study an exception? The facts do In 1986, in the state of Pennsylvania (when and where the experiment took place), there was a total of 202 total death row inmates. Out of the 202, 141 of those were white, fifty-six were black, two were Hispanic and two were of other races. In contrast, in 1999, out of 235 death row inmates, 148 were black, seventy were white, fifteen were Hispanic, and two were of other races (“State Penalty Info.” 6) The same is true for states like Ohio when in 1999, out of 200 inmates, ninety-nine were black, ninety-seven were white, one was Hispanic and three were of It has also been argued if the death penalty is a deterrence to crime. As can be guessed this is one of the most controversial issues of the problem, considering that it is the whole support for many Executions in the past were usually been done in public. By doing so it was believed that it would deter those witnessing from committing the crimes of the wrongdoer. Actually, it was such an affair in those days that families would make a day of the occasion, having picnics and other types of merriment in course before the execution. In fact, it was probably the secondary thing on the minds of the participants and Such incidents are evidence enough for anti-death penalty supporters (abolitionists) that capital punishment doesn’t deter crime. They believe that capital crimes are done in moments of passion, when the criminal doesn’t think rationally, whether about his or her crime, or in this case, the consequence (Kronenwetter 18-19). But what about those that premeditate their murders? Proof for abolitionists is that other murderers, the ones who plan or premeditate their crime, think they are too clever to get caught. Taking this into consciousness, the death penalty won’t and cannot discourage them either, because they believe they have escaped penalization of any kind for their actions. Moreover, Albert Pierrepoint, the famous British executioner on one occasion said: “Not once did the death penalty act as a deterrent in all the jobs I carried out... and I have executed more people than anyone this century!” (Amnesty 313-315). Statistical data seems to agree here. Let’s look at four states with death penalties and two without the death penalty and compare crime rates. The state of Texas (which interestingly carries out one of four executions each year in the United States since 1976), has a murder rate of one murder per 6, 385 residents. In Florida, we have one murder per 9,952 residents, while Georgia has one per 8,997 residents, and Virginia has one per 11,249. On the other hand, non-capital punishments states, like Wisconsin and Minnesota, their crime rates are one per 20,383 and one for an amazing 43,750 respectively (U.S. Criminal Justice Statistics On the flip side, retentionsists argue that none of these statistics prove that the death penalty never deters crime. They believe such rates depend on urban population, economic prosperity, and social and racial makeup of the people. Likewise, states like Florida and Texas would even have higher murder rates if the death penalty were not in place to keep thinks partially in check (Kronenwetter 51). An experiment conducted by Isaac Elrich, looked into how deterrence may affect the murder rate in the United States. In this study he explained: “...per additional execution...may result in, on average, seven or eight murders per year.” However, Elrich’s conclusions were found to be controversial and unstable in some scientific aspects in the way he directed them (Wekesser 114-116). Supplementary support of Elrich’s view can be traced back to an early 1970’s Los Angeles Police Department report. According to this report, interviews with ninety-nine criminals who didn’t carry lethal weapons in their crimes. When asked for a reason, over half of them cited the fear of the death penalty as one of their reasons for not carrying Moreover, another good bit of confirmation for retentionists comes from Dr. Nicholas Fabian. In his essay “A Review of Capital Punishment,” he relays the following example: “With unfailing regularity, the opponents of capital punishment will quote recent statistical data which indicates there is no decline in murder rate after the introduction of the death penalty. So let’s isolate the problem. Assume there are two people living on an island. Number One murders Number Two, and for that crime, Number One, the murderer is executed. The application of capital punishment guarantees, with 100% certainty, that all crime on the island will be deterred. As the population of the island increases, the certainty factor of deterred crime decreases. With the popualtion of 1,000 the certainty value is one in 1,000, Dan with ten million is 1/10,000,000. In this case, eliminating one member of a large sample is not, and cannot be, statistically significant. This is how the opponents of capital punishment view the stats” (Fabian 1-2). One thing is for sure. Whether or not capital punishment deters crime in the witness and population, it deters the executed criminal from committing future crimes. By doing so, it also stands as a warning to all, and makes them yearn for a future or their own, unlike the executed. What are the stands on morality and justice? Since the death penalty is such a contestable issue, morality is a For abolitionists, a persons life is sacred. By taking human life in punishment, they believe this action “cheapens” it. They do believe that it might be necessary to kill someone in the case of battle, in self-defense, or to protect another person. They do not accept the notion that it is needed to kill criminals when there are other ways like life in prison without perol. Even in the case of terrorism, they stand strong in belief that human life is consecrated and should be treated as such unless God directs otherwise (Kronenwetter 31). To some abolitionists, life in prison without perol is viewed as a tougher punishment, than the contrarily swift and painless killing by legal sentence. A British philosopher John Stuart Mill once remarked: “What comparison can there be in point of severity, between consigning a man to the short pang of a rapid death, and immuring him in a living tomb, there to linger in what may be a long life in the hardest most monotonous toil, without any alleviation or rewards-- debarred from all pleasant sights and sounds, and cut off from all earthly hope, except a slight mitigation of bodily restraint, or a small improvement of diet?” The retentionist view of the morals of capital punishment is straight forward. They are concerned with the sanctity of the victims life rather than that of the murderers. Theodore Roosevelt once spoke out on this subject when he was a colonel in the Spanish-Mexican War, scoffed at the idea that a criminals life was too precious to destroy. He declared: “Inasmuch as, without hesitation, I have again and again sent good and gallant and upright men to die, it seems to me the height of folly both, mischevious and mawkish to contend that criminals who have deserved death should nevertheless be allowed to shirk it. No brave and good man can properly shirk death and no criminal who has earned death should be allowed to shirk it” (Kronenwetter 131). Again, this strengthens the argument that capital punishment doesn’t “cheapen” life, What do the numbers say? In a 1991 survey conducted by the Gallup Poll, out of 217 surveys, sixteen percent of those who opposed the death penalty said it was because of morality. However, out that same sixteen percent, eighty percent of them said the punishment should be left up to God. In contrast, only nine percent of 700 who supported it said it was to uphold morals. Out of that same nine percent, all of them said the reason they supported was to maintain and satisfy justice or “a life for a life” as was stated on the survey (Siegel 89). As you can see, capital punishment as an whole is a touchy issue. Both retentionists and abolitionists have their good and bad points. My own personal belief is that capital punishment is good and should be implemented, but only in a restricted role. I believe those that have murdered and have truly felt sorry for what they have done and have hopefully made amends with the Man Upstairs should have a chance for clemency. On the other hand, I do not agree that all life should be preserved. These exceptions would include folks like terrorists and those who had premeditated over there murders and still followed through. I guess view like mine don’t help the situation at all. There are still many people today who, after their executions have been found innocent. In the state of Illinois, the death penalty was abolished because over half of the state’s death row inmates were found innocent. If the executions were followed through, think of all the loss of life. These are the things that keep this issue in limbo. There will never be a solution to it. All we can hope for is that the verdicts and the sentencing is right and that numbers don’t lie! Bibliography: Bibliography 1. Fabian, Nicholas. “A Review of Capital Punishment.” Home page. 1997: 1-4. 21 Oct. 2000. http://webcom.net/~nfhome/capital.html 2. Kronenwetter, Michael. Capital Punishment. Denver. ABC-CLIO, 1993. 3. Nakell, Barry and Kenneth A. Hardy. The Arbitrariness of the Death Penalty. Philadelphia. Temple University Press, 1987. 4. Siegel, Mark A., et al. eds. Capital Punishment: Cruel and Unusual? Wylie, Texas: Informaiton Plus, 1996. 5. Stewart, Gail B. The Death Penalty. San Fransisco: Miner Press, 1998. 6. Wekesser, Carol, et al. eds. The Opposing Viewpoints Series: The Death Penalty. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, Inc., 1991. 7. Amnesty International. “When the State Kills... The Death Penalty vs. Human Rights.” London: Amnesty, 1989. 8. “State Death Penalty Informaiton.” Death Penalty Information. Home page. ACLU. 26 Oct. 2000. pp. 6 & 8 http://www.deathpenalty.org/states.html. 9. United States. Department of Justice. Buerau of Criminal Justice Statistics. Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics 1994. Kathleen Maguire and Ann L. Pastore, eds. Washington: GPO. 1995.

Word Count: 2132