Capital Punishment Should Not Be Allowed - Essay Example

Capital Punishment Should not be Allowed Introduction Capital punishment or death penalty is punishment by death (Marzilli, 2006). The crimes that lead to execution are termed as capital crimes or offences. Most nations have abolished capital punishment either in law or in practice except Japan, the United States, and North Korea as well as 33 other countries. This implies that the other 153 nations have completely outlawed the death penalty. Even though most nations have abolished capital punishment, an estimated 60 percent of the global population resides in nations where death penalties are administered, including China, Indonesia, the U.S, and India (Wilson, 2013). The death penalty is matter controversy in different nations across the world. The positions are varied based on either cultural region, or political ideology. Article 2 of the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union prohibits the use of capital punishment (European Union, 2010). Besides, the Council of Europe that is comprised of 47 member states does not allow capital punishment among its members. The public opinion in relation to the death penalty varies considerably. Nonetheless, studies have evidenced adequate reasons as to why the death penalty needs to be abolished. In this regard, the paper will discuss why capital punishment should not be allowed by arguing the pros and cons of the death penalty. Discussion The human life is valuable Hodgkinson and Schabas (2004) share the evidence that the death penalty needs to be illegalized because life is very valuable. Life is very important and even murderers are not supposed to be deprived the value of their lives. The death penalty treats human life as objects that can be played with and thrown away. This is inconsistent with fundamental premise of human beings possessing the common human dignity. May lead to the execution of the innocent people Life cannot be taken back and every justice system is vulnerable to failure. Therefore, capital punishment puts numerous innocent lives at risk (Kronenwetter, 2001). Any mistake from the prosecution team may lead to demise of an innocent person. Justices, prosecutors, and witnesses can makes mistakes, which may result in the wrongful convictions of persons. It therefore becomes inevitable that innocent individuals may be sentenced to death for capital crimes. For example, in America, according to Amnesty International an estimated 130 people have been found to be innocent who were on death row. The mentally ill persons may also be executed not knowing why the reasons for their mistakes. The uncooperative and cold behavior of the mentally challenged persons in the courtroom makes them unable to participate in the trials (Dye, 2015). However, it is often difficult to convince the jury that a person is suffering from mental illness. As a result, they convicted and put on death row when they are actually innocent. The wrongful execution of an innocent person will never be rectified as opposed to life imprisonment. Retribution is morally wrong The churches as well as other human rights organizations share the view that retribution is morally flawed. Also, some lawyers posit that death penalty is not really utilized as retribution for murder. Considering that execution is not done retributively, it is unsuitable to make use of retribution as a justification for capital punishment (BBC, 2014). According to the church, vengeance is immoral and retribution is a form of vengeance. Therefore, punishment only perpetuates more violence. Capital punishment is discriminatory The capital punishment often targets the minorities, certain religious groups, poor, and particular religious groups (Harris, Tamas, & Lind, 2008). For example, in most of the Islamic states women have mostly been targeted by the discriminatory Islamic laws. As a result, majority of the executed persons are women as compared to the number of men (Monshipouri, 2011). In the U.S, race is a potent influence on the criminal justice system. In 2013, a study by Amnesty found out that for every colored executed, five blacks would have received the death penalty. Most of the African-Americans have been increasingly received death row sentences (Brook, 2014). This is an immoral condition that calls for the rejection of capital punishment on moral grounds. It shows the unjust and unequal administration of punishment. Failure to deter violent crime Capital punishment does not deter someone from committing serious violent crimes (BBC, 2014). The U.S is the only western country that legalizes capital punishments has reported a surge in homicide rates in states where capital punishment is administered. The criminals are often motivated by publicity. For example, most of the terrorists carry out their activities to instill fear based on the publicity of the event. As for the other capital offenders, they engage in violent crime due to the publicity that comes with capital offences and capital punishment (Ganguly, 2002). An increase in the number of law enforcement agents has been found to reduce the crime rate. There is a general consensus among the social scientists that capital punishment has failed to prevent the occurrence of violent crimes. There is also very little scientific evidence on proof of execution having a significant deterrent effect in contrast to life imprisonment or imprisonment without the likelihood of parole (Harris, Tamas, & Lind, 2008). People need to be educated and made aware of the effects of the wrongdoings other than killing them It violates the right to live Everyone has an incontrovertible right to live. The right to life is the most basic of all the human rights entitled to a person. Therefore, executing a person on whatever crimes they have committed violates this right. In other words, people convicted and sentenced to death have their human dignity undermined that is inherent to each human being. Emphasis on the universal human rights has propelled the abolition of the death penalty in the recent past. Recently, the U.S Supreme Court started to recognize the norms of human rights as established elsewhere (Scherdin, 2014). Capital punishment brutalizes the society The brutalization effect of execution implies that violence is allowed through the death penalty (Brook, 2014). Statistics have shown that execution results in brutalization of the society in addition to increasing the rate of murder. More murders have occurred in nations where capital punishment is permitted. The murder rate in countries where the death penalty is illegalized was 4.01% per 100,000 people while in nations where capital punishment is allowed such as Japan and America the figure was 5.00 percent (Ganguly, 2002). Correspondingly, the death penalty strengthens the link between violent crime and law. Therefore, capital crimes also increase doing very little in the elimination of violent crimes in the society. Conducting an execution can be costly Life imprisonment is quite cheaper than the death penalty. Studies have demonstrated that the cost of executing an offender may be three times higher as life incarceration as a result of expensive death penalty trials, automatic appeals, extended trials, lawyer fees, expert witnesses, and high-level security for the death row convicts leaving lower staff-to-prison ratios (Brook, 2014). Therefore, by alleviating the death penalty saves a lot of money would otherwise be put to other uses. The states of New Jersey and New York cited the high cost of execution as one of the major reasons they abolished capital punishment. As an example, the cost of conviction and execution of the Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh was more than $13 million (International Commission Against Death Penalty, 2015). Long-term imprisonment is much cheaper than capital punishment. Capital punishment is degrading, cruel, and inhumane Most of the execution methods that used earlier were abandoned because they were considered as barbaric (Brook, 2014), such as beheading and use of firing squads. In this perspective, capital punishment is antiquated and regressive. However, irrespective of the capital punishment method used, like use of lethal injections, electrocution, and lethal gas usually cause enormous suffering to the victims as opposed to the other methods of punishments such as long-term incarceration (Harris, Tamas, & Lind, 2008, p. 102). By people killing people, it is not only inhumane, but also creates a murderous society that cherishes in the death of other people. Death penalty has negative psychological effects on the related people. Both the victim and family members experience trauma prior and after the execution. Most of them are left suffering from depression for the rest of their lives. Post-traumatic stress disorder is described as an anxiety that is triggered by trauma (Breslau, 2002, p.923). It has been found out that the people who carry out the executions suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. It is against the medical ethics The death penalty violates the medical ethics of life preservation. The physicians who administer the lethal injections often forego the oaths they took as medical professionals by participating in the killing of another human being (Dye, 2015). This makes the medical ethics to suffer from gross infraction. Denies one the chance for rehabilitation Execution rebuffs one’s opportunity for treatment and rehabilitation (Dye, 2015). If known that his or her life has an expiry date they usually see no reason of rehabilitation and instead develop core violent behavior. The proponents of treatment as a remedy for addressing criminal behavior set forth the view that punishment increases rather than reduces future criminal activity. The rehabilitationists argue that what makes individuals to engage in delinquency are both biological and sociological, and can be corrected. This will assist the society understand the motives the crime. Counter arguments Execution fits as punishment for capital crimes On the other hand, the death penalty needs to be allowed as a punishment for the various reasons. The fundamental principle of justice is to provide punishment that befits the crime. The crimes of rape, treason, torture, murder, and kidnapping pivot on a moral code that every mistake is supposed to punished in equal measure with an indisputable true proof by expert testimony. The society would plunge into lawlessness if it could not act on moral assumptions. Even though the abolitionists contend with the notion that capital punishment is immoral because human life should not be taken, the fact is the death penalty honors the dignity of humans by treating the defendant as a free moral actor with the ability to control his or her destiny for either good or bad. As cited by Pojman (2000), execution is a punishment by society for a deserving criminal. It is equally important to note that a person on death row has time to prepare for his or her death, such as writing a will, something which the victim did not have. Therefore, the victim’s right to freedom was violated. Fear deters crime Nobody denies people fear nothing more than death (Dye, 2015). Therefore, people less fear life in prison as compared to death. Crime would be reduced for the fear of being punished with death. More to the point, execution protects the community from future murders, kidnappings, treason, and rape (Wilson, 2014). Even though prison time is an effective crime deterrent, some people usually need more and that is where the death penalty comes in. If a capital offender on parole is released or escapes, there are chances of the capital crimes being committed again and execution eliminates this chance. In 2011, a study by Grant McClellan on the States of North Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Rhode Island, Utah, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts found out that six of these 10 states that had legalized the death penalty had fewer murders. The death penalty is a form of crime deterrent. Humane execution methods The idea that capital punishment has been in existence for centuries implies that the society had accepted it as a form of punishment. However, just because an execution may result in pain does not imply the method qualifies as cruel and inhumane. For example, the State of Kentucky in the U.S has adopted the most humane execution method where the offender experiences very minimal pain, such through electrocution as well as lethal injection (Scherdin, 2014). Regardless of the execution method, the core purpose is to punish the criminal by death. It punishes only the guilty In the era of information technology, it is rare to execute an innocent person. DNA testing as well as other forms of modern crime scene science can now effectively do away with any uncertainty in relation to a person’s innocence or guilt (Wilson, 2013, p.45). In this case, justice is not only better served but also the chances of killing an innocent person are very minimal. Conclusion In summary, taking the life of someone only perpetuates the cycle of violence. Therefore, most nations across the globe have outlawed the penalty. Proponents of capital punishment argue that it is the justified remedy for reducing capital crimes, moral, and punishes only the guilty. On the other hand, the reasons for criminalizing capital punishment are: it is inhumane and barbaric, against the free will of humans, costly, brutalizes the society by encouraging violent crimes, retribution is morally flawed, people have the right to live, human life is valuable, have negative psychological impacts, denies one the opportunity for rehabilitation, and is against the medical ethics. If people weigh the arguments properly, they will be inclined towards abolition of capital punishment. However, the criminal justice system in the country makes legislatures, courts, and the Supreme Court chooses to resolve the issues. References BBC. 2014. Arguments against capital punishment: Retrieved April 22, 2015, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/capitalpunishment/against_1.shtml Breslau, N. 2002. “Epidemiologic studies of trauma, posttraumatic stress disorder, and other psychiatric disorders. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 47(2): 923-929. Brook, Dan. 2014, July 15. Kill the Death Penalty: 10 Arguments Against Capital Punishment. Accessed April 22, 2015, from http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/07/15/kill-death-penalty-10-arguments-against-capital-punishment Dye, Tracy. 2015, January 1. Top ten reasons the death penalty should be abolished: Accessed April 22, 2015, from http://www.listland.com/top-10-reasons-death-penalty-abolished/ European Union. 2010, August 3. Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Accessed April 21, 2015, from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf Ganguly, Anad. 2002. Group Discussion. New York: Sage. Hanks, Gardner. 1997. Search Results. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Harris, Gardenia, Bernard Tamas and Nancy Lind. 2008. Dynamics of Social Welfare Policy: Right Versus Left. New York: Rowman & Littlefield. Hodgkinson, Peter and ‎William Schabas. 2004. Capital Punishment: Strategies for Abolition. London: Thames. International Commission Against Death Penalty. 2015, April 23. Why the Death Penalty should be abolished: Accessed April 23, 2015, from http://www.icomdp.org/arguments-against-the-death-penalty/ Marzilli, Alan. 2006. Capital punishment. New York: Routledge. Monshipouri, M. (2011). Human Rights in the Middle East: Frameworks, Goals, and Strategies. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Kronenwetter, Michael (2001). Capital Punishment: A Reference Handbook. New York: ABC-CLIO. Pojman, Louis. 2000. The Death Penalty: For and Against. London: Kogan Page. Scherdin, Lill. (2014). Capital Punishment: A Hazard to a Sustainable Criminal Justice System? Chicago: Ashgate Publishing. Weinberg, Jon. 2008. “Sword of Justice? Beheadings Rise in Saudi Arabia.” Harvard International Review, 29(4):15. Wilson, Robert. (2013). Capital Punishment. London: Sage. Read More