Should The Death Penalty Be Banned?
For any society to function and advance, there must be an able and functioning justice system. For many of these so-called civilized societies, the death penalty is the height of justice. The death penalty, also called Capital Punishment, is the judicially ordered execution of a prisoner for a serious crime. In other words, it is legally putting a condemned person to death. The death penalty was devised as a deterrent to the most gruesome of crimes. But, as societies evolve, questions arise as to the validity of the death penalty as a means of punishment. Should the death penalty be banned?
A Brief History: The death penalty as we now know it was first established in the 18th century B.C. under the reign of King Hammaurabi of Babylon. In 1608, Captain George Kendall became the first recorded person to be executed. In 1924, cyanide gas was introduced as a means of death penalty. 1982 marked the year for the first ever execution by lethal injection.
Characteristics of Death Row prisoners in the U.S.:In 1980, the ratio of Whites: Blacks was 60:40; In 2000, this ratio was 55:45. In 2000, majority of death penalty prisoners in 2000 are between the ages of 35 and 54--2019 out of 3593 prisoners, or 56%. This is in sharp contrast to 1980 where a majority of prisoners were between the ages of 25 to 34. In 2000, 0.3% of the total death row inmates were under the age of 20; 6.5% between the ages 20 to 24; 30% between the ages 25 to 34, 56% between 35 and 54, and 6% above the age of 55.
In 2000, 5% of the inmates had completed 7 years or more of formal schooling. The majority (33%) had completed 12 years of schooling. In 1980, only 22% had 12 years of schooling. Which also goes to show that despite being in school for so long, people have not been instilled with the basic social and moral values.
In 1980, 37% of inmates were never married, 32 % were married while serving their sentence, and 30% were divorced. In 2000, 48% were never married, only 20% were currently married, and 30% were divorced.
In 1980, the majority, 26%, were executed within one year of their sentencing, and only 3.92% had to wait for 6 years or more for their execution. In 2000, this trend was reversed. Only 5.78% were executed within one year of sentencing , while 58%--2092 inmates out of 3593--had to literally wait to die for six or more years.
There were only 49 women on death row in the US as on 1st October 2003--which constituted a mere 1.4 % of the death row population.
Methods of execution:All developed countries have forsaken primitive execution means like hanging in favor of more humane ways of killing a person(note the irony!). The lethal injection is the most popular choice with 38 out of the 50 US states prescribing the lethal injection. Electrocution is still a legally valid means of execution in eight states. Hanging is still valid in Delaware, New Hampshire, and Washington. The firing squad is an option if you live in Idaho, Oklahoma, and Utah. Anyone in Arizona, California, Missouri, and Wyoming want to opt for lethal gas????
Juveniles, Mentally retarded & the Death Penalty:There are 73 death row inmates (all male) sentenced as juveniles, i.e. under the age of 18 at the time of the crime. They constitute 2% of the total death row population. 23 inmates have been executed for crimes committed by them as juveniles. 36% of the US states allows 16 year olds to be prosecuted as an adult--thereby making the death penalty an option for sentencing. A May 2002 Gallup Poll found that a majority of Americans--69%--oppose execution of juveniles. Pro-lifers argue that a person under the age of 18 has not developed his/her full intellectual ability, hence they should be rehabilitated--not executed. The USA is one of only eight countries (Bangladesh, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen being others) that executes juveniles.
The Supreme Court of the US on 20th June, 2002, issued a landmark judgment ending the execution of mentally retarded inmates. The Court held that executing mentally retarded people violates the ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
The View From Abroad: Mary Robinson of U.N. Commission on Human Rights said "The increasing use of the death penalty in the U.S.A and in a number of other states is a matter of serious concern and runs counter to the international community's expressed desire for the abolition of the death penalty." The UN. Commission on Human Rights raised the following objections:
*Execution of juvenile offenders.
*Mentally retarded prisoners.
*Foreign nationals not informed of their rights under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
*Racial and economic bias
*Length of time waiting to die.
The U.S. has become the most flagrant transgressor of the international ban on executing juveniles. Currently, 26 U.S. states allow mentally retarded people to be executed. The international trend towards the abolition of the death penalty and the U.S.'s refusal to abide by existing international law regarding capital cases puts the United States in an increasingly embarrassing position.
In March, 1999, Pope John Paul II made perhaps his last visit to the U.S. and was greeted by hundreds of thousands of followers. His message to the U.S. was unequivocal: "I renew the appeal I made most recently at Christmas for a consensus to end the death penalty, which is both cruel and unnecessary.
The European Union has banned all forms of execution among its member nations. In fact, it is one of the key criteria for any aspiring country wanting to join the E.U.. Europe also has a poor image of America due to this very issue. If the death penalty were banned, the world would have a better image of the U.S.
According to an Amnesty International Report released in 1999, the total number of executions world-wide have dramatically decreased, indicating the desire of teh global community to abolish the death penalty. The total number of world-wide executions in 1998 was 1625; while it was 2375, and 4272 in the two preceding years.
The Case for a Ban:The death penalty is a barbaric practice that has no relevance in today's time. It violates basic human rights. It violates the "Cruel and Unusual" clause in the Bill of Rights. There are innumerable cases of botched-up executions--horrific accounts ranging from the condemned vomiting to the person's body parts catching fire, to their eyes popping out of their sockets during an execution. All advanced nations have adopted the lethal injection as their primary means of execution. While the injection may be more "humane", it is by no means fool-proof. The mental agony that these prisoners go through in the days leading up to the execution is another silent form of torture. To say nothing of the mental anguish of the prisoner's family and friends who have to psyche themselves up to see a loved one being killed by the State.
The death penalty has created, or at least encouraged, the "eye for an eye" mentality among people. The victim's families believe it is their right to see the perpetrator being put to death. The death penalty was NOT designed as a means of retribution or vengeance; but rather as a deterrent. Only when people move away from this tit-for-tat mentality will civilizations advance. As far as deterrents go, life in prison--locked away in a 6 feet by 9 feet cell with no visitors or exercise-- is a much better form of deterrent.
Another argument made by pro-lifers is that if the Government says that killing another human being is wrong, then the Government should not kill another human being either. How can the Government expect its citizens not to kill, when they are killing people themselves (albeit in the guise of a "death penalty")!
Most people in favor of the death penalty say that they do not want to waste their tax dollars on keeping a murderer/rapist alive in jail....That killing him would be a cheaper alternative. However, that is simply not the case. The financial cost of capital punishment to tax payers is several times that of keeping an inmate alive in prison. In Texas, a single death penalty case costs an average of $2.3 Million. This is about three times the cost of imprisoning a person in a single cell at the highest security for 40 years. Enforcing the death penalty in Florida costs an average of $51 million more than what it would cost to punish all first-degree murders with life in prison without parole. With mandatory appeals and special requirements for capital cases, the cost of a death penalty case exponentially rises as compared to the cost of trial and life imprisonment. In addition, scarce legal resources could be freed up for more pressing issues.
Criminal proceedings for a death penalty case is fallible. There are many instances when death row inmates have been exonerated, sometimes minutes before their scheduled execution. Since 1973, over 100 people have been released from death row. Innocent inmates spend an average of 9 years incarcerated prior to being released. In 2003, 10 people in the U.S. have been exonerated. Can we as a fellow human being live with ourselves if we mistakenly put the wrong person to death? Some believe that juries are less likely to convict if it means putting a person to death. So, if the death penalty was abolished, the conviction rate for crimes like murder and rape would most certainly increase.
The death penalty has not fulfilled its role as a deterrent. Texas has the highest rate of executions; yet its murder rate is one of the highest in the country! Region-wise, southern USA has executed 740 people, while the murder rate in the South is 6.8 persons per 100000--the highest in the USA as compared to a national average of 5.6/ per 100000. This clearly shows the failure of the death penalty as a deterrent. In fact 84% of criminologists rejected the notion that the death penalty acts as a deterrent. A 1995 Hart Research Poll of police chiefs in the USA found that a majority do not believe the death penalty is an effective law enforcement tool. Only one percent actually wanted to expand the death penalty usage!
At least in the USA, there is an undeniable link between race and the death penalty usage. There is a (conscious or subconscious) bias against minorities. Poor people and minorities are more likely to be executed than Whites. 98 % of the Chief District Attorney's that prosecute death penalty cases are White; only 1 % are Black. A study in Philadelphia found that for similar crimes committed by similar defendants, Blacks received the death penalty at the 38 % higher rate than others. According to the NAACP, out of a total of 3504 persons executed in the US as on 1st October 2003, 45 % were White, 42 % were Black, 10% were Hispanics. So while it may appear that an equal number of Blacks and Whites were being executed; let us not forget that Blacks are a minority in the US. Blacks made up just 12 % of the US population in 2000, while Whites make up 75 % of the population, according to the US Census.
Not only does the race of the defendant matter in a death penalty case, but also the race of the victim is equally important. 81 % of all death penalty victims were white, only 14 % were Black, and a mere 4% were Hispanic. The number of white defendants executed for crimes against Whites is a mere 12; while 187 Blacks were executed for murdering a white person.
The Case Against:Proponents of the death penalty believe that the death penalty is a fitting and just punishment for the truly horrid crimes committed by the prisoner. They believe that the best indicator of future behaviour is past behaviour....That if a person raped someone before, he is most likely to do it again. Hence, if the death row inmates were rehabilitated, they would likely commit a crime again. Hence, they believe the death penalty keeps ordinary citizens safe by permanently ensuring that convicted killers are never free to prey again. Proponents believe that banning the death penalty sends the signal to criminals that there is no crime in the country horrid enough, or gruesome enough to warrant the ultimate punishment of death. That it lowers the bar for every other punishment. When Chicago mayor commuted the death sentences of all the death row inmates in Chicago, there was a hue and cry regarding one case in particular....The gruesome murder of a pregnant woman, and not just that! The murderer ripped open the woman's uterus and pulled the baby out of her. Proponents believe that a crime like this definitely warrants a death sentence...That its not just the murder of a woman, but the nature of the crime that warrants a death penalty.
Then there is the issue of closure. The victim's families believe that unless they see the condemned being put to death, they wont get closure. However, countless victim's families who have eye-witnessed the execution of the condemned, say that it does not bring closure. Closure has to do with forgiveness, not vendetta.
Proponents also believe that the justice system favors the criminals over the victim. They argue that pro-lifers make a big deal about the rights of the condemned, while forgetting about the rights of the victim. According to them, a person who has committed a gruesome crime like murder has lost his chance to be treated with humanity. But these people are losing sight of one important fact--That no matter what punishment is meted out to the condemned, it will never bring back the victim.
They also argue that the alternative to death--a life sentence-- is too light a punishment. That it undermines the loss of a human life. They point out to studies that show a high percentage of murders being committed by prison parolees or escapees.
Basically their arguments boil down to this one statement made by a bereaved mother:My son was brutally killed. I have lost him forever. Why should the murderer have another chance to life?
Final Comments: Behind every act of anger , there is pain. Clearly, no one is denying or ridiculing the pain and suffering of the bereaved. And no one is asking for the criminals to be let out into society either. If the condemned are, in fact, guilty of a barbaric crime, they deserve to be locked up away from society. But the fact remains that the death penalty is equally barbaric. Therefore, the death penalty should be banned as a means of punishment.
Resources:
http://www.balancedpolitics.org/death_penalty.htm
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/
For any society to function and advance, there must be an able and functioning justice system. For many of these so-called civilized societies, the death penalty is the height of justice. The death penalty, also called Capital Punishment, is the judicially ordered execution of a prisoner for a serious crime. In other words, it is legally putting a condemned person to death. The death penalty was devised as a deterrent to the most gruesome of crimes. But, as societies evolve, questions arise as to the validity of the death penalty as a means of punishment. Should the death penalty be banned?
A Brief History: The death penalty as we now know it was first established in the 18th century B.C. under the reign of King Hammaurabi of Babylon. In 1608, Captain George Kendall became the first recorded person to be executed. In 1924, cyanide gas was introduced as a means of death penalty. 1982 marked the year for the first ever execution by lethal injection.
Characteristics of Death Row prisoners in the U.S.:In 1980, the ratio of Whites: Blacks was 60:40; In 2000, this ratio was 55:45. In 2000, majority of death penalty prisoners in 2000 are between the ages of 35 and 54--2019 out of 3593 prisoners, or 56%. This is in sharp contrast to 1980 where a majority of prisoners were between the ages of 25 to 34. In 2000, 0.3% of the total death row inmates were under the age of 20; 6.5% between the ages 20 to 24; 30% between the ages 25 to 34, 56% between 35 and 54, and 6% above the age of 55.
In 2000, 5% of the inmates had completed 7 years or more of formal schooling. The majority (33%) had completed 12 years of schooling. In 1980, only 22% had 12 years of schooling. Which also goes to show that despite being in school for so long, people have not been instilled with the basic social and moral values.
In 1980, 37% of inmates were never married, 32 % were married while serving their sentence, and 30% were divorced. In 2000, 48% were never married, only 20% were currently married, and 30% were divorced.
In 1980, the majority, 26%, were executed within one year of their sentencing, and only 3.92% had to wait for 6 years or more for their execution. In 2000, this trend was reversed. Only 5.78% were executed within one year of sentencing , while 58%--2092 inmates out of 3593--had to literally wait to die for six or more years.
There were only 49 women on death row in the US as on 1st October 2003--which constituted a mere 1.4 % of the death row population.
Methods of execution:All developed countries have forsaken primitive execution means like hanging in favor of more humane ways of killing a person(note the irony!). The lethal injection is the most popular choice with 38 out of the 50 US states prescribing the lethal injection. Electrocution is still a legally valid means of execution in eight states. Hanging is still valid in Delaware, New Hampshire, and Washington. The firing squad is an option if you live in Idaho, Oklahoma, and Utah. Anyone in Arizona, California, Missouri, and Wyoming want to opt for lethal gas????
Juveniles, Mentally retarded & the Death Penalty:There are 73 death row inmates (all male) sentenced as juveniles, i.e. under the age of 18 at the time of the crime. They constitute 2% of the total death row population. 23 inmates have been executed for crimes committed by them as juveniles. 36% of the US states allows 16 year olds to be prosecuted as an adult--thereby making the death penalty an option for sentencing. A May 2002 Gallup Poll found that a majority of Americans--69%--oppose execution of juveniles. Pro-lifers argue that a person under the age of 18 has not developed his/her full intellectual ability, hence they should be rehabilitated--not executed. The USA is one of only eight countries (Bangladesh, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen being others) that executes juveniles.
The Supreme Court of the US on 20th June, 2002, issued a landmark judgment ending the execution of mentally retarded inmates. The Court held that executing mentally retarded people violates the ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
The View From Abroad: Mary Robinson of U.N. Commission on Human Rights said "The increasing use of the death penalty in the U.S.A and in a number of other states is a matter of serious concern and runs counter to the international community's expressed desire for the abolition of the death penalty." The UN. Commission on Human Rights raised the following objections:
*Execution of juvenile offenders.
*Mentally retarded prisoners.
*Foreign nationals not informed of their rights under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
*Racial and economic bias
*Length of time waiting to die.
The U.S. has become the most flagrant transgressor of the international ban on executing juveniles. Currently, 26 U.S. states allow mentally retarded people to be executed. The international trend towards the abolition of the death penalty and the U.S.'s refusal to abide by existing international law regarding capital cases puts the United States in an increasingly embarrassing position.
In March, 1999, Pope John Paul II made perhaps his last visit to the U.S. and was greeted by hundreds of thousands of followers. His message to the U.S. was unequivocal: "I renew the appeal I made most recently at Christmas for a consensus to end the death penalty, which is both cruel and unnecessary.
The European Union has banned all forms of execution among its member nations. In fact, it is one of the key criteria for any aspiring country wanting to join the E.U.. Europe also has a poor image of America due to this very issue. If the death penalty were banned, the world would have a better image of the U.S.
According to an Amnesty International Report released in 1999, the total number of executions world-wide have dramatically decreased, indicating the desire of teh global community to abolish the death penalty. The total number of world-wide executions in 1998 was 1625; while it was 2375, and 4272 in the two preceding years.
The Case for a Ban:The death penalty is a barbaric practice that has no relevance in today's time. It violates basic human rights. It violates the "Cruel and Unusual" clause in the Bill of Rights. There are innumerable cases of botched-up executions--horrific accounts ranging from the condemned vomiting to the person's body parts catching fire, to their eyes popping out of their sockets during an execution. All advanced nations have adopted the lethal injection as their primary means of execution. While the injection may be more "humane", it is by no means fool-proof. The mental agony that these prisoners go through in the days leading up to the execution is another silent form of torture. To say nothing of the mental anguish of the prisoner's family and friends who have to psyche themselves up to see a loved one being killed by the State.
The death penalty has created, or at least encouraged, the "eye for an eye" mentality among people. The victim's families believe it is their right to see the perpetrator being put to death. The death penalty was NOT designed as a means of retribution or vengeance; but rather as a deterrent. Only when people move away from this tit-for-tat mentality will civilizations advance. As far as deterrents go, life in prison--locked away in a 6 feet by 9 feet cell with no visitors or exercise-- is a much better form of deterrent.
Another argument made by pro-lifers is that if the Government says that killing another human being is wrong, then the Government should not kill another human being either. How can the Government expect its citizens not to kill, when they are killing people themselves (albeit in the guise of a "death penalty")!
Most people in favor of the death penalty say that they do not want to waste their tax dollars on keeping a murderer/rapist alive in jail....That killing him would be a cheaper alternative. However, that is simply not the case. The financial cost of capital punishment to tax payers is several times that of keeping an inmate alive in prison. In Texas, a single death penalty case costs an average of $2.3 Million. This is about three times the cost of imprisoning a person in a single cell at the highest security for 40 years. Enforcing the death penalty in Florida costs an average of $51 million more than what it would cost to punish all first-degree murders with life in prison without parole. With mandatory appeals and special requirements for capital cases, the cost of a death penalty case exponentially rises as compared to the cost of trial and life imprisonment. In addition, scarce legal resources could be freed up for more pressing issues.
Criminal proceedings for a death penalty case is fallible. There are many instances when death row inmates have been exonerated, sometimes minutes before their scheduled execution. Since 1973, over 100 people have been released from death row. Innocent inmates spend an average of 9 years incarcerated prior to being released. In 2003, 10 people in the U.S. have been exonerated. Can we as a fellow human being live with ourselves if we mistakenly put the wrong person to death? Some believe that juries are less likely to convict if it means putting a person to death. So, if the death penalty was abolished, the conviction rate for crimes like murder and rape would most certainly increase.
The death penalty has not fulfilled its role as a deterrent. Texas has the highest rate of executions; yet its murder rate is one of the highest in the country! Region-wise, southern USA has executed 740 people, while the murder rate in the South is 6.8 persons per 100000--the highest in the USA as compared to a national average of 5.6/ per 100000. This clearly shows the failure of the death penalty as a deterrent. In fact 84% of criminologists rejected the notion that the death penalty acts as a deterrent. A 1995 Hart Research Poll of police chiefs in the USA found that a majority do not believe the death penalty is an effective law enforcement tool. Only one percent actually wanted to expand the death penalty usage!
At least in the USA, there is an undeniable link between race and the death penalty usage. There is a (conscious or subconscious) bias against minorities. Poor people and minorities are more likely to be executed than Whites. 98 % of the Chief District Attorney's that prosecute death penalty cases are White; only 1 % are Black. A study in Philadelphia found that for similar crimes committed by similar defendants, Blacks received the death penalty at the 38 % higher rate than others. According to the NAACP, out of a total of 3504 persons executed in the US as on 1st October 2003, 45 % were White, 42 % were Black, 10% were Hispanics. So while it may appear that an equal number of Blacks and Whites were being executed; let us not forget that Blacks are a minority in the US. Blacks made up just 12 % of the US population in 2000, while Whites make up 75 % of the population, according to the US Census.
Not only does the race of the defendant matter in a death penalty case, but also the race of the victim is equally important. 81 % of all death penalty victims were white, only 14 % were Black, and a mere 4% were Hispanic. The number of white defendants executed for crimes against Whites is a mere 12; while 187 Blacks were executed for murdering a white person.
The Case Against:Proponents of the death penalty believe that the death penalty is a fitting and just punishment for the truly horrid crimes committed by the prisoner. They believe that the best indicator of future behaviour is past behaviour....That if a person raped someone before, he is most likely to do it again. Hence, if the death row inmates were rehabilitated, they would likely commit a crime again. Hence, they believe the death penalty keeps ordinary citizens safe by permanently ensuring that convicted killers are never free to prey again. Proponents believe that banning the death penalty sends the signal to criminals that there is no crime in the country horrid enough, or gruesome enough to warrant the ultimate punishment of death. That it lowers the bar for every other punishment. When Chicago mayor commuted the death sentences of all the death row inmates in Chicago, there was a hue and cry regarding one case in particular....The gruesome murder of a pregnant woman, and not just that! The murderer ripped open the woman's uterus and pulled the baby out of her. Proponents believe that a crime like this definitely warrants a death sentence...That its not just the murder of a woman, but the nature of the crime that warrants a death penalty.
Then there is the issue of closure. The victim's families believe that unless they see the condemned being put to death, they wont get closure. However, countless victim's families who have eye-witnessed the execution of the condemned, say that it does not bring closure. Closure has to do with forgiveness, not vendetta.
Proponents also believe that the justice system favors the criminals over the victim. They argue that pro-lifers make a big deal about the rights of the condemned, while forgetting about the rights of the victim. According to them, a person who has committed a gruesome crime like murder has lost his chance to be treated with humanity. But these people are losing sight of one important fact--That no matter what punishment is meted out to the condemned, it will never bring back the victim.
They also argue that the alternative to death--a life sentence-- is too light a punishment. That it undermines the loss of a human life. They point out to studies that show a high percentage of murders being committed by prison parolees or escapees.
Basically their arguments boil down to this one statement made by a bereaved mother:My son was brutally killed. I have lost him forever. Why should the murderer have another chance to life?
Final Comments: Behind every act of anger , there is pain. Clearly, no one is denying or ridiculing the pain and suffering of the bereaved. And no one is asking for the criminals to be let out into society either. If the condemned are, in fact, guilty of a barbaric crime, they deserve to be locked up away from society. But the fact remains that the death penalty is equally barbaric. Therefore, the death penalty should be banned as a means of punishment.
Resources:
http://www.balancedpolitics.org/death_penalty.htm
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/
posted by Zenobia at 10:29 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home