Capital Punishment: The Death Penalty History and Arguments

The ultimate crime in any religion, society and time period has been the taking of a life from another human being. Throughout the history of man, from the hunters and gathers to present day, there have been rules to regulate society. Having an ultimate consequence for an absolute act is not only just, but necessary. The consequence should always fit the crime in one way or the other. Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, has been around for ages. Sometimes unrecorded but justifiably there none the less, has shaped the way justice systems have worked throughout time. Without a severe effect for an immoral cause, society would fall apart.

The death penalty has been around since the beginning of time. Its first recorded existence however, was in the eighteenth century B.C. when King Hammurabi of the Babylonians established the Code of Hammurabi.1 When the American colonies were established in the 17^th century, the European settlers brought Great Britain's set of laws, including the death penalty, along with them.¹

From the time the United States was founded in 1776 to present day, a countless number of legislations, cases, and laws have taken place to reconstruct and further capital punishment regulations. Today, thirty-eight states have the death penalty, along with the United States government and military, while the other twelve and the District of Columbia, do not.¹ So now some questions remain, in what way do we carry out capital punishment? Should we let the accused rot away in prison for the remainder of their lives? Or should we take what they have taken from another, and in what way? In the past, we have used different methods of carrying out executions; this has led to further debates on whether capital punishment is cruel and unusual.

Early in time, capital punishment came by activities such as beatings, stoning, drowning, and crucifixions.1 Today, the United States has more swift and sure ways of carrying out an execution. Since 1976, when the death penalty was reinstated, there have been 1076 executions by five specific methods (in order from least to most popular): firing squad, hanging, gas chamber, electrocution and lethal injection.1 All of these types of execution methods could raise a red flag as to whether it is a humane action or not. A question based on the old saying "two wrongs do not make a right". How can someone justify a murder by another?

Over the past thirty years when capital punishment became legal once again, debates have risen as to whether it is a justifiable punishment and if it does any good for society as a whole. On the most general of levels and most heard of, the conservative right against the liberal left has caused many public battles. Is an eye for an eye the correct way to approach a situation? Or should the innocent take the part as the bigger person and show mercy? This topic, like the abortion debate, will always be around based on the fact that people will always have opinions. So, is capital punishment good or bad?

When a person looks at the capital punishment debate, it is clear to see that each side, for and against, have justifiable reasons. Seemingly, each debate contradicts the other side, making this issue a very complex one. Every point has its converse and as the issue becomes more detailed, the arguments begin to take shape.

Conservatives have the perspective that capital punishment is needed to keep our society together. With each topic on the issue they provide many points to support their position. One of the most common and strongest arguments for capital punishment is its deterrence factor. Supporters believe that the death penalty is so severe that it will "deter capital crimes and possibly save lives in the process."2 Another positive in their minds is that once the criminal is executed they can no longer commit crimes.² What is better than the ultimate punishment? To many conservatives, the answer is undoubtedly nothing.

A column written by a police officer in Nebraska, Jim Davidsaver, opposes the fact that the death penalty deters crime. He claims that in his career, out of all the murderers he and his brother officers have taken in, he believes that none were actually deterred by the death penalty.3 They seemed to have disregard for themselves and other and did not care what happened to them, hence the reason they committed the crime in the first place.

To liberals however, life imprisonment may be a better option in capital cases. They claim that when you imprison a murderer for life, he can no longer commit tragedies against society anyway.² Also, they claim that an execution, like everything else, costs money. The more people we execute, the more money we spend on something we have a better option for.

Those opposed have more than just this rebuttal argument. In fact, they have a whole arsenal of arguments in their favor. Two common oppositions would be the ever interesting race factor and the chance of executing an innocent person.

"African Americans only take make up about 13 percent of the U.S. population; they made up 43% of the inmates on death row in 1999."² Why is such a small culture in America taking up such a large portion of those being sentenced to death? There is no explanation for that fact only skeptical opinions ranging from discrimination to the broken-windows theory. Cases are studied and many solutions to this problem are trying to be put in place.

As for mistakes being made in capital cases, it is widely agreed that if it does occur it is an extreme rarity. Opposition can make an easy claim stating that where an inmate can be released on proof of innocence, a dead convicted killer whose innocence is proved can not get his life back. And who can argue with this fact?

Supporters for capital punishment have a response for both arguments. Respectfully, on the case for the fact that there are more African Americans on death row than whites while still taking up only 13% of our population, they statistically commit more crimes than whites.2 Also, African Americans capital crimes are more than likely against other African Americans, showing that "racial issues cut in both directions."² So it is not a racism factor to supporters, but more of a cultural issue.

For the fact that irreversible mistakes could be made, columnist Dennis Prager claims that "society must be prepared to pay that terrible price...Among other reasons, because more innocents will be killed by murderers who are not executed."4 A conservative in most stances, Prager gives his view points on capital punishment and even shows a case study in his column. He claims that by executing a murderer it shows everyone how atrocious that crime actually is.⁴

A good question to approach this topic would be whether "capital punishment is incompatible with a civilized society."5 Than what constitutes a civilized society? To some, a civilized society does not have the death penalty.⁵ But to others, "it is a cosmic injustice to allow a murderer to keep his life."⁴ So in order to find out if the death penalty is the correct form of punishment, we have to define a civilized society. This idea will only bring on more than needed controversy, further hardening the issue and making it more difficult to come out with a result.

Capital punishment, though highly debated, is still around today through all of the controversy. Seemingly, the only way that this rule would be abolished is if someone of great stature came up with concrete evidence showing that the death penalty does not do anything to protect society and actually loses the government money in the long run. Both approaches, liberal and conservative, have strong and weak points in their argument. Each of which, contradicts the other. An excellent solution to this problem would be if a couple of scientists and criminologists got together and experimented and studied the effects of the capital punishment rule.

The death penalty can be looked at today as a base for a strong, swift, and sure way of carrying out punishments. It is the absolute, irreversible consequence. However, it can also be looked at as an expensive, inconvenient, mistake. People may end up spending years on death row before actually becoming executed, and the continuous appeals do not help the cause. In the recent past, horrible monsters such as Timothy McVeigh (Oklahoma City) in the United States, and more recently, Sadaam Hussein have been charged with horrendous crimes and put to death. These current executions did take some time to carry out, but in the end these vicious people, will not be affecting the world with their negative presence any longer. People need to understand the issue fully and comprehend the consequences of both final punishments, death and life imprisonment.

WORKS CITED

Davidsaver, Jim. "NEW VOICES: Law Enforcement Officer Says Death Penalty is Too

Expensive and Does Not Deter Crime." Death Penalty Information Center.

30 Mar. 2007.

< http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=2288&scid=64>"Deadly Steaks: The debate over capital punishment." The Free Republic.

24 Mar. 2007.

"Death Penalty." Almanac of Policy Issues. 2001. 19 Mar. 2007.

Death Penalty Information Center. 2006. 30 Mar. 2007.

Prager, Dennis. "Capital Punishment - Another Argument for It." Human Events.Com.

24 Mar. 2007.

1 Death Penalty Information Center (www.deathpenaltyinfo.org)

1 Death Penalty Information Center (www.deathpenaltyinfo.org)

2 Death Penalty - Almanac of Policy Issues

3 Death Penalty Information Center (www.deathpenaltyinfo.org) Article by Jim Davidsaver

2 Death Penalty - Almanac of Policy Issues

4 Capital Punishment - Another Argument for It by Dennis Prager

5 Deadly Stakes: The debate over capital punishment- The Free Republic