Do Death Penalty Proponents Have an Irrefutable Argument?

Pro death penalty proponents make many arguments in favor of capital punishment. Deterrent arguments, economic arguments, ethical arguments and the approval polls are but four of many. If you want to see the death penalty abolished once and for all you probably know the counter arguments against each one one of them. But do death penalty proponents have one argument that cannot be refuted? Those who favor the death penalty say that they do and it is based on the value of a human life.

Specifically involved in the argument is the issue of how much value should we as a society place on a human life? And more specifically, how much value should we place on the lives of some very specific individuals-- prison guards, a witness to a murder, and the case of multiple murder victims. The best way to demonstrate why the death penalty is needed is by using these three classes of people in examples.

They are powerful examples. In fact, it used to be that I was not in favor of the death penalty but after hearing this argument in the form of examples I am now in favor of the death penalty in limited instances. Here is the argument and the examples that changed my mind.

The prison guard
Say that Inmate X is serving a sentence in prison of life without parole for murder. There is a prison riot. A prison guard is taken hostage. When the prisoner's demands are not met, in retaliation, Inmate X murders the prison guard in cold blood. After the riot is over Inmate X stands trial for the murder of the prison guard. He is convicted, but because the death penalty does not exist he is sentenced to life without parole. What is the value of the life the murdered prison guard? What value is society placing on the life of the murdered prison guard.

A witness to a murder
Say that Gangbanger Y is to stand trial for the brutal murder of a pizza delivery man that was witnessed by an innocent passer-by. Gangbanger Y will almost certainly get a sentence of life without parole if he is convicted of murdering the pizza delivery man. He has nothing to lose. Gangbanger Y successfully arranges the murder of of the innocent passer-by who witnessed the murder of the pizza delivery man. The case against Gangbanger Y for the murder of the pizza delivery man must be dropped. There is no witness to testify against him. Eventually Gangbanger Y is brought to justice for the murder of the innocent passer-by witness. He stands trial for murder. The death penalty does not exist. Gangbanger Y is convicted of the murder of the innocent passer-by and sentenced to life in prison without parole--the exact same sentence he would have gotten had he been convicted of murdering the pizza delivery man. What is the value of the life of the innocent passer-by witness to the murder of the pizza delivery man? What value is society placing on the life of the murdered witness?

Multiple murder victims
Intruder Z breaks into a residence in the dead of night. Intruder Z's intention is to burglarize the residence and he expects no one to be at home. Unexpectedly he comes upon the woman who lives in the house. He sexually assaults her and murders her. The woman's three young children, ages 5, 9, and 11, wake up and see Intruder Z in the hallway of the residence. Intruder Z murders the three children as well. He is caught and stands trial four times. The death penalty does not exist. Intruder Z is given life without parole for the murder of the mother. He is then tried and given life without parole for the murder of the 5 year old. He then stands trial twice more and in those two murders is also given life without parole. What is the value of the lives of the murdered children? What value is society placing on the lives of the murdered children.

Proponents of the death penalty point to these examples as the reason that we must have capital punishment available and in these limited circumstances I have to agree with them. Without it, the lives of these particular classes of victims are devalued to nothing by society.