The Advantages and Disadvantages of Capital Punishment - Case Study Example

 The capital punishment has been a controversial issue in the United States. The stand taken by the federal government, human rights activists and the state government has made capital punishment part of a discontinuous debate that seems to have no end. Many different views have been advanced based on the moral, legal, punishment and economic perspectives. A considerable number of states have banned the death penalty in their jurisdiction unless the federal government decides to do (Marzilli, 2008). The paper examines the advantages and disadvantages of the capital punishment based on the legal, moral and punishment perspectives. The proponents of the capital punishment believe capital punishment is a necessary tool for the judicial service to deal with serious crimes of the modern world. In most countries, capital punishment is for capital crimes, which include terrorism, murder, and any other serious crime against humanity. It is upon the government and the law to demonstrate that the system has no sympathy for hardcore criminals. Capital punishment has been supported by many people because of the belief that the number of hardcore criminals would increase if the law shows sympathy. The death penalty is meant to scare other potential criminals show that the justice system is ruthless. Capital punishments involve taking the lives of many other human beings, which justifies capital punishment. Someone who kills people also deserves to die (Stelker & Stelker, 2010). Terrorists and serial killers who are put in the death row are very dangerous if allowed to return to the society. The justice system uses capital punishment to make potential danger associated with letting hardcore criminals into the society is eliminated. The underlying notion is that some criminals are just meant to undergo rehabilitation. For example, most terrorists and serial killers are dedicated to their cause, and even a jail term would do nothing to change their mind (Unnever, Bartkowski, & Cullen, 2010). The capital punishment helps the system to protect innocent lives by making sure the lives of the most dangerous criminals is taken (Stelker & Stelker, 2010). The law has been put in place to protect the people who cannot protect themselves and bring order. Therefore, the law is obligated to eliminate the criminals who pose a danger to countless innocent lives and show no signs of change. Technological development has reduced the possibility of criminal investigators making a mistake, which can lead to the conviction of the wrong person. The use of DNA has enhanced the effectiveness of the criminal investigation department. Punishing the right people for their crimes is a fitting way to control crimes in the society. The idea is that capital punishment is justified if the right person has been caught for committing any of the capital crimes. The death penalty helps in reducing the prison population, which is a significant problem in the United States. The death penalty reduces the body count and facilitates a fitting punishment for hardcore criminals. The state can hit two birds with one stone by reducing prison expenditure and implementing the law. Some proponents of the capital punishment claim it provides closure to the families of the victims. It can be hard to move on knowing very well that the criminal is alive (Naas, 2012). Capital punishment provides closure because the family of the victims might believe in the law of an eye for an eye. The abolition of the capital punishment in 18 states is evidence that there is tough opposition against capital punishment. The death penalty is opposed by many Christians because of the belief that no one has the right to take a life. The opposition to the capital punishment is related to religious values that believe human beings have no power to take the life of someone regardless of their crime. From a moral perspective, everybody deserves a chance to die his or her natural death. Everyone deserves a chance to rehabilitate and change his or her ways. Capital punishment gives too much power to the state. It gives the state the power to life-based on punishing criminal convicted of capital crimes. The thought of the state playing God is not something that rests will many religious people. The claim that capital punishment provides closure to the families of the victims does not make sense to the human rights activists (Naas, 2012). Many human rights activists do not believe that capital punishment is the only way to give families closure. On the contrary, capital punishment can breed a guilty conscience on some families who might feel responsible for the death of the convicted criminal. The disadvantage is that capital punishment might present more problems to the grieving relatives instead of facilitating closure. The total cost required to cover a death penalty prosecution is expensive to the cost of a life sentence. Normally, many appeals would follow a death penalty sentences meant to change the sentence. It is very expensive to accommodate many appeals because of the cost of paying lawyers and the time. Time is an essential resource for the judicial system given that there are many cases to be heard and judgments to be given. Factoring all costs associated with a death penalty, it is arguably more expensive than the cost of supporting person serving a life sentence. In some cases, the convicted individual can be mentally sick or the jury can make a decision based on personal feelings/race instead of focusing on the facts of the case (Unnever, Bartkowski, & Cullen, 2010). These actions might take put an individual on death row without proper justification. The capital punishment makes it possible for some jury members and law officers to exercise unwarranted revenge by pushing for a death sentence. It is not ethical to put mentally comprised individuals on the death penalty. It goes against the principles of the constitution, which seeks to protect all citizens from harm. Human beings are fallible, which only means that they can make mistakes. What happens when the wrong person is convicted of a crime that deserves capital punishment? The case of Coke and John Brite is evidence that a death penalty can lead to the loss of innocent lives. Coke and John Brite were convicted of killing Deputy Martin Lange, Deputy Joseph Clarke, and Captain Seaborn. The death of the three officers led to the conviction of the two brothers (Coke & John Brite, n.d.). The Brite brothers gave a story where the two deputies and captain Seaborn had attacked them at night. They only acted in self-defense. Nobody took the story of the Brite brothers seriously, and they ended up in prison. Investigations by a non-governmental organization revealed that the Brite brothers did not kill the three officers. They had been attacked only defending themselves. The case of the Brite brother is evidence that a mistake can lead to loss of innocent lives. The Brite brothers were found guilty and sentenced to death. In conclusion, the advantages of the capital punishment are that it shows that the justice system is merciless, which prevents potential criminals. Death penalty protects innocent lives by making serial killers and dangerous terrorists are not allowed back in the society where they might take many lives. It provides closure to families. On the other hand, capital punishment can lead to the death of innocent citizens since investigators can make a mistake. It is very expensive to put someone on death penalty compared to a life sentence (Stelker & Stelker, 2010). Capital punishment is inhumane. It allows the state to play God in deciding who deserves to die or live. It is not ethical to put mentally ill patients on the death row regardless of their crimes. References Coke & John Brite. (n.d.). Retrieved from Victims of the State: http://www.victimsofthestate.org/CA/Brite.html Marzilli, A. (2008). Capital Punishment. New York: Chelsea House. Naas, M. (2012). The Philosophy and Literature of the Death Penalty: Two Sides of the Same Sovereign. Southern Journal of Philosophy, 50, 39-55. Stelker, C. S., & Stelker, J. M. (2010). No More Tinkering: The American Law Institute and the Death Penalty Provisions of the Model Penal Code. Texas Law Review, 89(2), 353-365. Unnever, J. D., Bartkowski, J. P., & Cullen, F. (2010). God Imagery and Opposition to Abortion and Capital Punishment: A Partial Test of Religious Support for the Consistent Life Ethic. Sociology of Religion, 71(3), 307-322. Read More