Spencer Heflin
Critical Thinking Blog
Death Penalty
Humans are innately flawed with bias. We hold bias towards those unlike ourselves, towards those who live different lifestyles…even towards those whose skin is a different color. Society is aware of the many biases that pervade our streets, yet it continues to make unwarranted judgments. The most unwarranted and selfish judgment society makes is that of defining the value of a person’s life. The death penalty does just that—it deems one human life less valuable than others. Committing a crime does not strip someone of their humanity and certainly does not give others permission to do so either. The death penalty should be made illegal in the United States due to the fact that it violates moral, ethical, and economic standards.
The value of human life seems to be ignored when the death penalty is invoked. The death penalty denies basic human rights and seems to reject the idea that “human life has intrinsic value” (Robinson 2). There is no one person in the world where one can argue their life has absolutely no significance. The death penalty weakens this intrinsic value of human life; it is too important to be snuffed out by anyone, even the state.
There is unfairness in the death penalty because it does not take into account the mentally ill, classism, racism, and sexism. Should the mentally ill be put to death if they do not know better? I do not believe so because some do not have conscious control over their actions. The mentally ill should be tried case by case because the judicial system fails to realize that in some extreme circumstances people cannot control themselves. There was a study conducted by a Texas Civil rights group that claimed that out of 2 dozen convicted criminals on death row, “all had been so seriously abused during childhood that they probably all suffered from brain damage” (Robinson 2). This shows that the justice system does not take into account mental illnesses when not doing so is ignorant. This civil rights group also suggested that, “women convicted of murder are almost never executed” (Robinson 2). This quote proves that court systems often prejudice against men. Furthermore, according to a 1986 study in Georgia persons who killed, “whites were four times more likely to be sentenced to death than convicted killers of non-whites” (Robinson 2). This illustrates the black and white difference in the judicial system and the racist use of the death penalty. According to Stephen Bright, a defense lawyer for convicted death row inmates, “defense lawyers are often incompetent” (Bright). He commented that many of the defense lawyers had fallen asleep during their client’s trials and we not specifically trained to deal with death penalty cases. In many cases, “district attorneys are given unrestricted discretion” (Robinson 2), to the use of the death penalty. Most D.A.’s are not monitored or regulated at all and can seek the death penalty for anyone they see fit.
The chance of error is also present in every death penalty case because convicted murderers are often killed and later found innocent or pardoned. A recent study showed that, “at least 350 people between 1900 and 1985 in America might have been innocent of the crime for which they were convicted, and could have been sentenced to death” (Robinson 2). The legal system only provides guidelines; it is not always right or wrong. There is always some chance of error but, when someone’s life is at stake, cases should be inspected more carefully so numbers like 350 will not occur.
According to the American Civil Liberties Union, “capital punishment is barbarous” (Bedau 11), and the article goes on to suggest that the death penalty is cruel and unusual and inhumane. This is because in some places of the world people are still executed by hanging, firing squads, and electrocution. It is undeniable that these are inhumane ways of killing people because they do not minimize pain. When something is inhumane it lacks pity or compassion and making death a painful process does not show either.
According to an article on the politics of the death penalty, the families of the prisoners put to death usually also suffer. The article comments that, “the prisoner’s family must suffer from seeing their loved one put to death by the state, as well as going through the emotionally-draining appeals process” (Messerli 2). On one hand, the family of the victim is suffering because they have just had a loved one killed; however, killing off the criminal is only hurting his/her family as well. Not only does the death penalty hurt multiple families at once but is also useless in terms of revenge. The tolerance article also mentions that, “killing a murderer does not bring his victim back to life. It achieves nothing but the death of still another person” (Robinson 2). I believe that revenge cannot be accomplished through the death penalty as stated in the previous quote. It is like the saying “an eye for an eye would make the world blind” I believe that the death penalty accomplishes very little.
The death penalty also has negative economic connotations because it would be more cost efficient to keep someone in prison for life than to kill them. The politics article illustrated that, “most people don’t realize that carrying out one death sentence costs 2-5 times more than keeping that same criminal in prison for the rest of his life” (Messerli 1). This is because of the appeals process and additional required procedures. It is wasting the taxpayer’s money to put someone to death if it is cheaper to keep them in jail. This same article suggests that, “life in prison is a worse punishment and a more effective deterrent” (Messerli 1). With the death penalty, the prisoner’s suffering is over almost instantaneously. While it might not be compassionate, if people know they will suffer when they go to jail, it will deter them from committing crimes in the first place.
The death penalty has no benefit, whether one looks at it from a moral or material perspective. Killing a murderer does nothing more than perpetuate the cycle of violence and condone killing. In a society that promotes peace and compassion, the death penalty makes no sense. It is completely counter-productive to the overall moral goals of society, as well as places undue financial burdens on society. The economic aspect does not, however, overshadow that fact that the death penalty is morally wrong. With the death penalty, our justice system becomes the murderer.
Works Cited
Bedau, Hugo Adam. “The Case Against the Death Penalty.” American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved: May 11, 2010. http://www.aclu.org/capital-punishment/case-against-death-penalty
Bright, Stephen: Gave a lecture at Elon that I attended
Messerli, Joe. “Should the Death Penalty Be Banned As a Form of Punishment?” Balanced Politics. Retrieved May 9, 2010. http://www.balancedpolitics.org/death_penalty.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment