Death penalty or capital punishment remains a controversial debate for both proponents and opponents. Recent statistics demonstrate that support for death penalty continues to decline and the United States remains the only country in the developed world that has capital punishment for people convicted of certain crimes. Critics of capital punishment posit that death penalty violates the constitutional provisions that outlaw cruelty and unusual punishment while guaranteeing due process of the law and equal protection (Brandon, Alexander & Ankur, 2017) . Further, state and federal government should not confer on themselves the right to kill human beings; especially killing with premeditation as well as ceremony, by basing its argument in law or its people. Therefore, this paper provides arguments from both proponents and critics of death penalty but takes the position that capital punishment causes more harm and does not deter or serve the intended purposes. As such, capital punishment should be abolished in the United States because it is violates its Constitution, is immoral and fails to deter crime.
Argument for Death Penalty
In their study, Setharaju et al. (2016) highlight factors that influence support and opposition to death sentence. Further, the study illustrates that a majority of Americans continue to support death penalty over the past four decades; though the percentage has been declining with recent figures showing that just about 55% support death penalty. Again, support for death penalty is highest among white Americans and males as compared to minority races and females. In addition, independents, democrats and the highly educated show the least support for death penalty as opposed to Republicans, and less educated persons that express the greatest support for capital punishment.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Proponents of the death penalty argue that capital punishment is essential since it allows law enforcement agents to maintain law and order. In addition, death penalty provides deterrence since it makes others to shy away from committing heinous crimes like murder, homicide, and rape among others. Supporters believe that executing the offenders provides effective deterrent than life imprisonment (Brandon et al., 2017) . Further, they also believe that death penalty is the best way for the affected individuals to get retributive justice because it ensures that those who commit such crimes get to pay in equal measures. Retribution carries two aspects: the doctrine of “just deserts” and retribution as revenge. Under “just deserts,” proponents argue that an offender’s punishment must be proportionate to the harm that he or she has caused through the criminal act. Under the idea of revenge, retribution is considered as an emotional response because of the pain, anguish and anger experienced by those affected by the heinous act committed by an individual. Therefore, through execution of the perpetrators, those affected will relieve their suffering.
Crime deterrence is one of the strongest arguments presented by supporters of capital punishment. Recent statements by President Trump on death penalty for individual suspects illustrate the most conservative reason that supporters have in favor of the capital punishment (Chammah, 2018). Supporters assert that capital punishment is cost effective as it allows the justice system to deal with the individual in a prudent manner as opposed to life imprisonment that will require both state and federal governments to spend money on running the correctional facilities for many years when a convict is behind bars. Supporters of capital punishment believe that it provide incapacitation since murderers can kill again if they are not executed through capital punishment. Therefore, these arguments are advanced with a view of ensuring that death penalty is not abolished but remains a critical part of the justice system; especially the need to attain retributive justice.
Argument against Death Penalty
Opponents of capital punishment believe that execution is immoral, unfair and amounts to carrying an injustice on people; irrespective of their conviction. As such, they argue that death penalty should be abolished because it does not serve the purposes that it claims. Many oppose the death penalty because it is immoral and lacks ethical foundation. It is inhumane to kill someone. While an offender may have killed, no justification exists to mete out similar actions on him or her. As such, the death penalty negates the principle of equal protection as depicted in the American Constitution.
Secondly, evidence has demonstrated time and again through many cases where the convicted were executed that innocent people have been killed (American Civil Liberties Union, 2019). As such, this is a salient reason for opponents who believe that death penalty sentences have always been decided based on emotional catharsis. Many people sentenced to death row have been released on many occasions because serious doubts arise about their convictions and guilt. For example, over 155 people have been released since 1973 while on death row because of serious doubts about their convictions and guilt. Again, many have opposed the death sentence or penalty since it is unfairly applied and has disproportionate effect on minorities (Sethuraju et al., 2016) . Further, while proponents believe that death penalty offers deterrence, critics assert that capital punishment does not deter murderers and instead it shows the brutality of the criminal justice system. While the system is aimed at offering corrections and rehabilitation for criminals, capital punishment demonstrates the brutality inherent to the system and may lead to an increase in violence and homicide rates in the country. Again, like emotional catharsis that affects those who support the penalty, even critics may be driven by emotional response instead of being sober and reasoning. As such, the debate is at crossroads and all arguments have merit and justifications. However, death sentence or penalty should be viewed more pragmatically than the current debate that pits serious opposing arguments.
A pragmatic Approach to Death Penalty Debate
A pragmatic reflection should go beyond the arguments for and against because an effective criminal justice system must base its tenets on the rule law as well ethical and philosophical underpinnings defined by modern society. Death penalty or capital punishment has been practiced by societies since time immemorial. However, human beings must look at the argument from a pragmatic perspective; one where they base their arguments on broader interpretation of the constitutional provisions and aspects of free democracies where retributive justice should not form the basis of the justice system.
Retributive justice is laced with vengeance and a justice system cannot base its foundations on catharsis but strong legislations that are inherent to human dignity. Amnesty International asserts that death penalty symbolizes a system that promotes a culture of violence and not a solution to it. Amnesty believes that death penalty does not provide answers even when international law allows it to be used in the most heinous crimes like intentional killings (Amnesty International, 2018) . The American Bar Association (ABA 2013) is categorical that fairness and accuracy form the foundations of the criminal justice system in the country. Therefore, stakeholders should ensure that all are given equal protection and due process irrespective of their perceived legal status during their trials and conviction. As such, perpetuating death sentence negates the foundations of fairness and accuracy in the system. The continual decline in death penalty across the country indicates that there is a growing need to relook at capital punishment and seek alternative ways to mete out punishment as opposed to executions (American Bar Association, 2013).
Conclusion
It is evident that death penalty is inhumane, does not offer deterrence and aims at emotional catharsis as opposed to upholding the dictates of the constitutional provisions in the country. Therefore, this research paper suggests that death penalty should be abolished even in the most restrictive situations since it only breeds more resentment from the people and even victims. Capital punishment constitutes the intolerable denial of inherent civil liberties and violates the fundamental values of a good democratic system.
References
American Civil Liberties Union (2019). The Case Against the Death Penalty. Retrieved from
https://www.aclu.org/other/case-against-death-penalty
American Bar Association (2013). ABA Death Penalty Due Process Review Report; 2006-2013.
Retrieved from https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/death_penalty_moratorium/aba_state_of_modern_death_penalty_web_file.authcheckdam.pdf
Amnesty International (2018). Death Penalty: Overview. Retrieved from
https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/death-penalty/
Brandon L. G, Alexander, J., & Ankur, D. (2017).The American Death Penalty Decline, 107 J.
Crim. L. & Criminology 561.Retrieved from https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7612&context=jclc
Chammah, M (2018). What to Know About the Death Penalty in 2018. Retrieved from
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2018/01/03/what-to-know-about-the-death-penalty-in-2018
Sethuraju, R., Sole, J. & Oliver, B. E. (2016). Understanding Death Penalty Support and
Opposition Among Criminal Justice and Law Enforcement Students. Sage Open Journals, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015624952
