The topic of crime control cannot be fully discussed without the subject of the death penalty as a means of punishment being explored. Punishment for crimes committed is seen as one form of controlling crime; and the death penalty is the ultimate punishment a government can enforce. The death penalty “debate” does not really fit the definition of a “debate” anymore, considering how heated people get over the topic. However, this is natural considering that the death penalty is just that, death as punishment for a violent crime. The remainder of this blog will discuss a few arguments in favor of the death penalty, against the death penalty, and a possible middle ground concerning the death penalty.
There are many arguments “against” the death penalty. A few of which are the following: the possibility that innocent people is put to death, the increased cost for everyone involved in the process when the death penalty is in effect, and the possibility that the death penalty is racially discriminate. First, let us discuss the possibility that an innocent person could be wrongly killed by the death penalty. This remains a major issue wherever the death penalty is in effect. Our criminal justice system is run by humans, and as humans we make mistakes. It should be noted that these mistakes are not relegated to people sentenced to death row, but in every aspect of punishment. People sitting in jails and prisons have been found to be sentenced and serving time for a crime they did not commit. With the inability to undo death, the media focuses on the innocent people who were sentenced to death row. If a person is wrongfully convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment, they can be released and exonerated because they are still alive. As of March 17, 2011, 267 people have been exonerated by the Innocent Project. According to http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/ there are nine people that have been killed, but there is strong evidence that they were innocent. Second, it costs more money to allow the death penalty as a punishment option. Once a person is sentenced to death row, their case is automatically appealed and if they do not have the money to pay for a lawyer, the costs of the appeals fall on the government which inherently falls on the taxpayers. Financial statistics from http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/ relay the fact that research done in 2005 shows that California spends $114 million dollars more per year above the cost that would keep inmates in prison for life. Research done in 2000 shows that Florida was paying $51 million dollars more per year above the cost that would keep inmates in prison for life. As of 2011, it is reasonable to assume that, in the United States, these costs have increased, just as the cost of living has increased. Finally, the death penalty is used to discriminate against people with a skin color other than “white.” http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/ reported statistics, that were updated March 10, 2011, that shows the race of the victim and the race of the people on death row, tallied since 1976. The race of the people on death row, in percentages since 1976 are as follows: 56.06% White, 34.93% Black, 7.15% Latino, and 1.85% Other. The race of the victims, in percentages since 1976 are as follows: 77.86% White, 14.51% Black, 5.41% Latino, and 2.22%. The same report additionally notes the race of the victim who was executed in a biracial murder. For a White defendant and a Black victim, 15 of the White defendants were killed. For a Black defendant and a White victim, 249 Black defendants were killed. In, February of 1990, a quote from the United States General Accounting Office, on death penalty sentencing, states "In 82% of the studies [reviewed], race of the victim was found to influence the likelihood of being charged with capital murder or receiving the death penalty, i.e., those who murdered whites were found more likely to be sentenced to death than those who murdered blacks." People against the death penalty site these statistics, and many more like it, to prove their point that the death penalty is not used equally as a punishment against “whites” and people with different skin colors.
In contradiction, there are also many arguments “for” the death penalty. Some of the most common arguments are as follows: the death penalty serves as a deterrent to would-be violent criminals and/or murderers, the death penalty permanently rids our society of violent criminals and follows the concept of “eye for an eye,” and the death penalty costs taxpayers less than paying for a criminal’s life in prison.
First, there is the idea that the death penalty serves as a deterrent to would-be violent criminals and/or murderers. At first glance, this statement would seem plausible. It seems rational that if a violent criminal and/or murderer were scared of being put to death, they would not commit that crime or murder. However, there are really no reliable statistics recognizing the death penalty as being a deterrent. With that said, the lack of statistics on this particular aspect of the death penalty are direct results of the lack of funds and time, and/or the notion that no deterrent affect has yet to be seen.
Second, the death penalty permanently rids our society of violent criminals and is a form of an “eye for an eye.” This is an intellectual argument. If a person is executed, they will not be murdering or hurting anyone else ever again. It is a common human thought/emotion/instinct to believe that if someone murders someone else, they should suffer the same penalty. Obviously, not everyone believes this or thinks this way, however, from the beginning of time, an “eye for an eye” has been identified as the ruling form of justice. Our justice system of today has toned down this form of action as there are trials, evidence, lawyers, judges, juries, etc. Yet, the end result is the same, the person executed will no longer cause harm.
Finally, the death penalty costs taxpayers less than paying for a criminal’s life in prison. The above statistics would seem to prove this statement wrong, but statistics can be seen from different viewpoints. All the costs of appeals, lawyers, time, etc. invested to reverse a capital sentence is what makes the money add up. People “for” the death penalty believe that if the execution of a person sentenced to death row actually took place soon after the conviction, the costs to the state and thus to the taxpayers would decrease. The average cost of an inmate, per year of incarceration is roughly $47,000. If a person was to spend part of their lifetime, say on average 30 years, the total spent on that prisoner comes to $1,410,000. While these numbers are staggering, it is without question that additional research is needed to determine how much money is actually spent on death row inmates.
The middle ground is that our country keeps the death penalty but take the time to reform it. Maybe more steps need to be established to keep unethical people from getting an innocent person convicted by way of double-checking everyone else. Maybe the cost of housing an inmate should be reduced, so that the people feel an inmate is being punished with more than just imprisonment. Maybe money spent should be watched more carefully, because with the amount that is being spent there is sure to be waste somewhere that can be cut down on. For proving whether or not the death penalty is a deterrent, there cannot be a true cause and effect unless more of the variables are controlled.
There are many issues that need to be discussed and fixed if the death penalty is to stay as a punishment in our society. Everyone seems to have their own opinion about the death penalty. However, everyone’s main concern should be that our course of action be just and that actions be able to stand up scrutiny.
Published: March 17, 2011. Accessed: March 17, 2011.
Published: Updated Constantly. Accessed: March 17, 2011.
Accessed March 17, 2011.
