Is the death penalty the best protection from a murderer? Is justice for the victim achieved through the death penalty?

GCSE Religious Studies (Philosophy & Ethics)

Name: Do Huu Minh Khoa

Instructor: Miss Hamidah

Question: Is the death penalty the best protection from a murderer? Is justice for the victim achieved through the death penalty?

As the 21st century begins, Americans are bombarded with the growing report of murders, violent crimes, especially the recent attacks of terrorists all over the country. The society has created many punishments to discourage such crimes and damages, furthermore, to ask the murderers to pay back what they have done. Since the society has the highest interest in preventing murder, it should use the strongest and most severe punishment available to deter murder, and that is no other than the death penalty, which has existed for thousands of years. The death penalty is considered as the legal infliction of death for violating criminal law, the right of taking a human's life is a serious problem, so the issue has continually created tension and debates in today society. Whenever the word "death penalty" comes up, extremists from both sides start yelling out their arguments. One side says deterrence, the other side says there is a potential of executing the innocents, one says justice, retribution and punishment, the other says execution is murder. Crime is an evident part of society, and everyone is aware that something must be done about it. But does the death penalty achieve its objectives and maintain fairness? To my opinion, there are two main reasons that the death penalty must not be used.

First, the death penalty is not the best protection from a murderer. In other words, it doesn't serve as a deterrent to criminal behavior as people used to think. Scientific studies of deterrent effect of the death penalty have been conducted for several years, with varying results. Most of these studies have failed to produce evidence that it deterred murders more effectively than the threat of imprisonment. There are 38 states in the US that have the death penalty as the punishment while the other 12 do not. When comparisons are made between states with the death penalty and states without, the majority of death penalty states show murder rates consistently higher than non-death penalty states ( from 48% to 101%). The average murder rate among 100,000 population in 1999 of death penalty states was 5.5 while the rate of non-death penalty states was only 3.6. The Times reports that 10 of the 12 states without the death penalty have homicide rates below the national average. "I think Michigan made a wise decision 150 years ago," said the state's governor, John Engler, a Republican, referring to the state's abolition of the death penalty in 1846. "We're pretty proud of the fact that we

don’t have the death penalty." In fact, states without the death penalty have better record on homicide rates. Another evidence that also prove the ineffectiveness of the death penalty is the comparisons of the rate of death by handguns in eight industrialized countries. The United States stands out with a rate of death much higher than the rate of other countries, 35 over one million people were killed with handguns in 1996, while there were only 0.5 in Britain. The United States is also the only country of the eight to retain use of the death penalty. These evidences prove ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

don’t have the death penalty." In fact, states without the death penalty have better record on homicide rates. Another evidence that also prove the ineffectiveness of the death penalty is the comparisons of the rate of death by handguns in eight industrialized countries. The United States stands out with a rate of death much higher than the rate of other countries, 35 over one million people were killed with handguns in 1996, while there were only 0.5 in Britain. The United States is also the only country of the eight to retain use of the death penalty. These evidences prove that murders are fearless of death penalty and most of them either do not expect to be caught or do not weigh the differences between a possible execution and life in prison before they act. Some murders premeditate their crimes and find way to escape from detection, arrest, and conviction; they never think of being arrested. Another reason is that most crimes are committed in the heat of the moment, it means during the moment of great emotional stress, anger, or under the influence of stimulants. General Jim Mattox, a former Texas Attorney who presided over many of Texas's executions, remarked, " It is my own experience that those executed in Texas were not deterred by the existence of the death penalty law. I think in most cases you'll find the murder was committed under severe drug and alcohol abuse." So, crimes are also caused by impulsive act, when logical thinking has been suspended. The death penalty does not show its positive effect, moreover, it may be an incitement to criminal violence. A 1995 Hart Research Associates Poll of police chiefs in the US found that the majority of police chiefs do not belief the death penalty significantly reduces the number of homicides. Actually, they ranked the death penalty last among effective ways of reducing violent crime. Police officers also suffer a higher rate of criminal assault and homicide in death penalty states than in abolitionist states. Not for a single year was evidence found that police are safer in jurisdictions that provide the death penalty. American Society of Criminology, the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences and vast majority do not believe that the death penalty is a proven deterrent and best protection from murder. The overwhelming conclusion from years of deterrence studies is that the death penalty is, at best, no more of a deterrent than a sentence of life in prison, it is severe enough for any rational person from committing a violent crime.

Second, it is an injustice for the victim to achieve through the death penalty. There are a number of extremely valid reasons that the states should stop the practice of death penalty. The first is the difference

between the death penalty and non-death penalty states. It seems that if people commit a murder in the states that do not carry the death penalty, they will not be executed. The methods of execution also vary among the states, the most widely used are electrocution, gas chamber and lethal injection. They are the most horrible and immoral punishments ever practiced on human beings, people are not killed at once but suffer a prolonged time of extreme agony. However, the most serious problem that requires the abolition of the death penalty is the wrongful execution of innocent people. Recent events have proved a lot of people who were on death row to be innocent. If these people were innocent, the others could have been, too. As the case of Anthony Porter in Illinois, 1998. Mr. Porter sat in his cell on death row in prison while the hours ticked away toward his scheduled execution. He was scheduled to be injected lethal poison as punishment for the murder of a man and a woman in Chicago Park. While the lawyers were arguing about the issue, a team of journalism students from Northwestern University began to examine the case against Porter and interviewed various witnesses. After a few months of investigation, they successfully proved that Anthony Porter was completely innocent and had nothing to do with the killings, the true killer was another man. Luckily, Mr. Porter was released just 48 hours before the execution, he was spared because of the informal efforts of concerned citizens, not because of the justice system. Studies show that in the last century, at least 400 innocent people have been convicted of capital crimes they did not commit. Of those 400, 23 were executed. Since the reinstatement of the death penalty, 102 men and women have been release from death row just some minutes away from execution. In other cases, DNA testing has also exonerated death row inmates. DNA testing was just invented in the early 1990s, due to advancements in science. If this testing had not been discovered until ten years later, many of these inmates would have been executed. The Colombia University Law School found that two thirds of all capital trials contained serious errors. When the cases were retried, over 80% of the defendants were not sentenced to death and 7% were completely acquitted. These statistics represent an intolerable risk and the inability of the U.S justice system to prevent accidental execution of innocent people. But wrongful executions are a preventable risk, not unintended fatalities. The unique thing about the death penalty is that it is final and irreversible. Once a victim is executed, nothing can be done to make amends if a mistake has been made and that is an injustice

which can never be rectified. By replacing a sentence of life without parole, we can meet society's needs of punishment and protection without running the risk of such an erroneous and irrevocable punishment. Another reason is that the death penalty is applied at random. Politics, quality of legal counsel and the jurisdiction where a crime is committed are more often the determining factors in a death penalty case than the facts of the crime itself. The death penalty is like a lethal lottery: of the 22,000 homicides committed every year but 300 are

sentenced to death. A study spans 25 years, from 1957 to 1982, in the first year, there were 8,060 murders and 6 executions. However, in the last year, there were 22,520 murders committed and only 1 execution was performed. So the lucky ones were able to escape from the death despite their causes of heinous crimes while the innocent or ill-fated ones might be put to death. Fairness requires that people who break the same law under similar circumstances should meet with the same punishment. However, the justice system is not consistent. Race is also a factor in determining who will be sentenced to death. With respect to race, a report in 1990 from the General Accounting Office concluded that 82% of the study, race of the victim was found to influence with the likelihood of being charged with capital murder or receiving the death penalty. The death penalty is racially divisive because it appears to consider white lives as more valuable than black lives. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, 158 black defendants have been executed for the murder of a white victim, while only 11 white defendants have been executed for the murder of a black victim. Such racial bias has existed over the history of the death penalty and appeared to be largely intractable. In some cases, the defendants cannot afford their own attorney or get a lousy lawyer who lack experience and falls asleep during the client's trial. Or if you underpaid them, they would fail to investigate the case properly. To some people, money is more important than justice. The prosecutors also try to send people to death row so that they can get promotion. A poorly represented defendants are much more likely to be convicted and given a death sentence, these people are vulnerable to be slandered or forced not to tell the truth, sometimes the execution is performed just for a vengeance of an individual and it has no place in the justice system. The last reason which shows the immorality and unfairness of the justice system is that some states also execute mentally retarded people, it is really cruel because these people do not understand the implications of what they are doing and they are not

guilty to receive such a punishment. There have been 44 people classified as mentally retarded to be executed in the United States since 1976. This is a conservative estimate, many inmates are not even tested for mental retardation before they are executed. The state of Texas leads the nation in executing the mentally retarded. This violates the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.

In conclusion, the death penalty should be abolished because of its ineffectiveness on many levels. The result also shows in the significant increase of people who oppose the death penalty in recent years. The death penalty fails its main objectives on protecting society against the murder or any heinous crimes. Moreover, it is a barbaric form of punishment that should not be allowed in the United States, which is supposed to be one of the most civil nations in the world; it also defies the U.S Constitution which most American hold sacred. And above all, the most considerable issue I desire for the abolition of the death penalty is that no more innocent people may have the chance of dying in this system and everyone is treated fairly. It also expresses my hope for the peace of the nations, we will live in a more educated society where crimes and murders are hardly heard of, no more crimes and no more death penalty.