Arguments for and against the Death Penalty - Essay Example

Death Penalty Introduction The death penalty has been surrounded in controversy over the years to eliciting strong opinions with both supporters and its opponents calling for either its abolition or continued application. Opponents calling for its abolition in the United States usually chide that the U.S. is one of the very few countries in the West that showcase continued application of death penalty. This criticism is mainly because American citizens have a higher likelihood of encountering a crime as compared to citizens of other Western countries. The public debating concerning this controversial issue shows that most Americans support the death penalty, although the presence of strong opposition to it should not be ignored. It is also found that some individuals support this form of capital punishment only under certain circumstances. Each group to augment their support or opposition to death penalty usually cites several reasons. This essay aims to discuss some of the most prominent arguments usually put forth either for or against the continued application of death penalty in the countries penal laws. Arguments for Death Penalty The main argument put forth by supporters of the death penalty is that it is a way of preventing future murders from taking place. The argument is that given that the society generally applies punishments as discouragements to would-be criminals, and that the society is highly concerned with prevention of murder, it is only prudent that the same society uses the most severe means of punishment available to deter murder. Moreover, the death penalty is considered the most efficient way of deterring future murders since people generally have a strong fear for death. In the same vein, it is not only the would-be murderers that are deterred by the death penalty, but the actual murderer is permanently ‘deterred’ from committing any further murders by being executed. Just like a robber is imprisoned to prevent him from robbing on the streets, a murderer should be killed to prevent them from committing the same crimes (Bedau and Cassel, 2004). Another line of argument in support of the death penalty posits that in a just world, taking of a life can only be penalized by a death sentence. This is because murdering somebody creates an imbalance of justice, which can only be restored through a death penalty. This is only in tandem with the religious backing on retribution, which advocates for ‘an eye for an eye’ (Kaufman, 2012). Arguments against death penalty The most prominent reason that is usually cited by those calling for the abolition of the death penalty is that it ultimately denies an individual the fundamental human right to life. The death penalty is considered as a premeditation of a cold-blooded murder of an individual by the state authorities as a way of ensuring justice for victims of murder. However, this cold-blooded killing of another human being is a direct violation of very fundamental human rights to life as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Yorke, 2008). One major argument fronted by those who are against the continued use of death penalty is that there is the risk of executing an innocent person. Since the death penalty is a sentence that cannot be revoked, the extant risk of putting to the electric chair an innocent person is reason enough to preclude its use. Surveys of the criminal justice system have indicated that there are those who had previously been convicted and put on death row only to be released later on upon emergence of evidence proving their innocence. Therefore, in order to avoid the risk of taking the life of an innocent person, it is proposed that the death penalty can be substituted by other forms of severe punishments such as life sentence without the possibility of a parole so that murders and would be murderers are deterred from committing further crimes (Pojman and Reiman, 1998). Another prominent argument against death penalty cites its unfair practical application, which is designed in a manner that makes it fail at singling out the worst offenders. The application of the death penalty is done based on various irrational factors including the competence of the defense legal team, the county where the murder was committed, or the racial background of the defender or the victim. This arbitrariness of the death penalty occurs when an individual commits a murder in a particular state or county and is sentenced to death, while another person in a different state that has abolished the death penalty commits analogous murder and is sentenced to life in prison. Moreover, the available statistics point to a discriminatory trend whereby a death penalty is likely to be invoked when a white person is murdered than a black person is the victim. Thus, the death penalty, in practice, is racially discriminating since it seems to value white lives over than black lives, a trend that appears to be fundamentally intractable (Jackson, 1996). Conclusion Debates concerning the death penalty remain far from settled, and will continue to elicit very strong divergent opinions. The numerous arguments put forward continue to shape and change our opinion regarding this controversial issue, providing sound basis and reasons for holding any of the two divergent views. Given the strong views and reasons for both sides, it is evident that the issue will not be resolved with national unanimity. Moreover, despite the fact that some states in the U.S. have abolished the death penalty from their penal codes, it is not reason enough to persuade supporters of this form of capital punishment to change their opinion. As discussed above, some of the murders committed are so vicious and inhumane that the only reasonable and justified punishment for such perpetrators is the death penalty. In the same breathe, the nature, purpose and meaning of the death penalty is still awash with obscurities besides the fact that there are problems associated with its implementation in terms of racial discrimination, potential execution of innocent persons, and the fundamental issue of upholding human rights. All these problems continue to present challenges to the morality and constitutionality of the death penalty, and have been effectively utilized by opponents in their calling for its abolition. It is therefore imperative that clear and coherent thought is employed in discussing this controversial issue to enable the making of an informed opinion based on facts and reason rather than emotions. References Bedau, H. A., & Cassell, P. G. (2004). Debating the death penalty: Should America have capita punishment? : the experts on both sides make their best case. New York: Oxford University Press. Jackson, J., & Jackson, J. (1996). Legal lynching: Racism, injustice, and the death penalty. New York: Marlowe & Co. Kaufman, W. R. P. (2012). Honor and revenge: A theory of punishment. Dordrecht: Springer. Pojman, L. P., & Reiman, J. H. (1998). The death penalty: For and against. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. Yorke, J. (2008). Against the death penalty: International initiatives and implications. Farnham, England: Ashgate. Read More