History of the Death Penalty

The cornerstone of the modern civilized society is its laws, and more importantly, the enforcement of those laws for the common good. Without law enforcement both as a deterrent to potential law breakers and as a means of punishing the guilty and removing them from society because of their potential to harm others, no peace or order could exist. In the cases of those individuals whose crimes are beyond heinous-such as mass murder, genocide, and the like- and their future possibilities of committing more crimes of an even worse nature are even remote, the option of putting those individuals to death has been utilized by humans for as long as recorded history has existed, and theoretically, even before the dawn of recorded history itself (Hood, 1996). When looking at the death penalty from an international, and historical perspective, one wonders how the idea of a death penalty got started, how effective it has been over the generations, and in the modern arena of debate, whether or not it is a useful tool in the present day, or an outdated form of murder in itself that should be relegated to the past. In this paper, these facets of the death penalty and more will be explored.

Where Did the Death Penalty Begin?

When this paper began, the point was acknowledged that the death penalty has undoubtedly existed since before the dawn of recorded history, but was not likely to have been the part of any kind of written law, but rather the result of local customs, family rules, or the result of those with the most power, whether derived from wealth or strength, made the decisions about how those around them would be forced to live-or die. In terms of the "written" law, which is to say a code of laws that were made permanent and enforced to the masses, one looks back at the Code of Hammurabi, dating back to ancient Mesopotamia? The Code laid out the rules by which the people were expected to live, and the penalties for not doing so, including death. In fact, the idea of "an eye for an eye" was first put forth in Hammurabi's Code itself. (Hood, 1996). From that point forward, the death penalty has been used extensively throughout history for crimes ranging from the ultimate crime of murder to adultery, theft, etc.

One of the most controversial uses of the death penalty in the New World occurred in the American Colony of Massachusetts in the early 1600s, when dozens of men and women were executed in the small coastal town of Salem, having been accused of witchcraft, tried and found guilty by what is seen in retrospect as a hasty and improper court system, and put to death in a range of brutal ways such as hanging, burning at the stake, drowning, and pressing, a particularly disgusting method of death whereby the condemned had stones placed upon their body while lying on the ground, until the weight of the stones "pressed" the life out of them (Bedau & Cassell,2004).

When looking at the issue of the death penalty throughout history, one question keeps surfacing- is the penalty appropriate for the crime? With this question in mind, a discussion of the propriety of the death penalty is valuable.

Is the Death Penalty Appropriate?

From the ancient Code of Hammurabi to the present day hanging of convicted despot Suddam Hussein, the debate of the validity of the death penalty continues to erupt in the arena of public opinion. Those who are in favor of the death penalty tend to use some common arguments in support of it, ranging from the citation of the Bible and other religious writings to the claim that the death penalty does in fact deter crime to a certain extent to those who use it in a more pragmatic fashion in order to reduce the overcrowding in the prison systems of the world. With these arguments in mind, an objective look at each one is useful.

Religious support of the death penalty, which is discussed in more detail in a subsequent section of this paper, seems to have a division along the lines of individuals who consider themselves as religious and may belong to a particular organized religion and the dogma of that religion itself. Many individuals claim to be in favor of the use of the death penalty, and make this claim based upon their religious beliefs which they interpret to be the avocation of the death penalty directly from God. However, no mainstream organized religion, which claims to broadcast the word of God, advocates the use of the death penalty because of one important rule which is found in all faith-based religions- the sanctity of human life in all forms (Bienen, 1999).

People with no particular religious views one way or the other have in some cases come to the defense of the death penalty, citing the fact that without it, the crime rate would surely increase, not only due to the possible release/escape of dangerous criminals who may otherwise be exterminated and thus posing no future threat to anyone, but also because of the value of the death penalty as a deterrent to criminal activity (Shortnacy, 2005). However, the statistics on the deterrent value of the death penalty are sketchy at best, for as many sources which cite the death penalty as a deterrent, there are a like number which show no difference between death penalty usage and the absence of it in terms of crime rates.

Religion Wrestles with the Death Penalty

The viewpoint of those from the religious community on the issue of the death penalty, or more precisely the morality and validity of the use of the death penalty in a modern world, resembles that of the proverbial house divided. As with so many other religious issues, there are those who will use the literal interpretation of "an eye for an eye" and other similar parables that are found in religious texts from the Holy Bible to the Quran to glibly put forth the idea that anyone who takes a life should in turn pay with their life. However, as with anything else, this assertion must be carefully used, especially when religious texts are looked at in more detail within their context, as well as the viewpoint of the religions which use them. Christians assert that God, because of examples in the Old Testament of the Bible, supports the use of death as a punishment for infractions ranging from adultery to murder, thereby mixing the immoral and the illegal, and affixing the ultimate penalty for both. Likewise, those with only a limited understanding of the Muslim faith will quickly say that Muhammad was likewise and advocate of the death penalty. However, the reality of both of these instances is vastly different than the truth. It can fairly be said that God is not in favor of the death penalty, when one take a closer look at the teachings of Jesus in the Christian tradition and Muhammad in the Muslim tradition (Morgan,2006). In both cases, pacifism, forgiveness, and tolerance are more prevalent than the attitude of taking lives in response to criminal/immoral acts.

World religions have likewise taken a stance on the death penalty issue, not necessarily from the viewpoint of a political or criminal justice issue, but more accurately from the point of view of a right to life issue. As an example, in the Christian tradition, the Roman Catholic Church, from the throne of the Pope down to the smallest parish priest, preaches the idea that all life is sacred, from the moment of conception to natural death (Morgan, 2006). Just as Catholics oppose the murder of people, dating back from the tradition of the original Ten Commandments, they likewise oppose the use of the death penalty, which in their eyes is a form of government sanctioned murder in some ways.

Once again, from the religious viewpoint, it can be seen that the death penalty is viewed as much too drastic and permanent of a solution for a problem that has not gone away as a result of the use of the death penalty, and essentially tries to use killing as a remedy for killing, with a net effect of the death toll from a murder as an example increasing by one or more after death penalties are carried out.

Equal Opportunity Executions

There is an additional area of debate in terms of the use of the death penalty- that of the execution of children and women. Ironically, those who are in favor of the death penalty in the case of a male adult offender, for example, would find the idea appalling for a woman or child in the same criminal circumstances (O'Shea, 1999). Perhaps this is something that shows that the death penalty is not as universally embraced as is professed by some groups and individuals. The process, it seems, cannot be selective- it is permanent and irreversible and if one group of people are held to a certain standard and punishment, so too should others be held to it. Of course, in the case of someone who does not possess the mental capacity to understand that they committed a crime, the death penalty may need to be looked at much closer, but generally speaking, there are very few exceptions in that type of case (Lang, 2004).

Is the Death Penalty "Morally Required"

The death penalty, in the minds of some, is required as a means of balancing the scales of justice so to speak- crimes that are horrible must likewise be made right by punishments that are just as horrible. This smacks of the ancient codes that demanded retribution in the case of crimes as a way of keeping the scales of justice in check. While this is something that sounds like it makes sense from the standpoint of balancing justice and repaying victims who cannot speak for themselves, it also opens up the question of whether or not death is being dealt out as a means of meeting a quota and not in the true interest of justice and the fulfillment of every person's entitlement to basic human rights.

First, how does one decide which crimes are worthy of a death penalty and who would be exempt from the death penalty? Second, who is of the caliber to make the determination? And on and on the questions could go. The point is that once a society decides that the death penalty is "necessary" because of some type of a karmic quota system, there truly is no turning back. Therefore, the challenge is to develop a set of criteria that determine that the death penalty is applicable in certain situations, or to say that overall, it is not applicable in any situation. The slippery slope here is fairly obvious and is the basis of many of the controversies surrounding the death penalty to this day, quite literally thousands of years since its first uses. For as far as the human race has come, and as far as it will progress, the issue of life and death, indeed one of the most basic of all human questions, still is hotly debated in the 21st century.

Conclusion

Works of research that are longer and more detailed than this have been devoted to analysis and judgment of the death penalty in the past, and surely more will in the future. Whatever the case, one thing is clear- there is no clear cut answer as to the question of the effectiveness, fairness or validity of the death penalty. The opinions are divided to be sure, along many different lines. In closing, perhaps the best that society can do is use its best judgment and hope that it is the right thing to do.

References

Bedau, H. A. & Cassell, P. G. (Eds.). (2004). Debating the Death Penalty: Should America Have Capital Punishment? The Experts on Both Sides Make Their Best Case. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bendle, M. F. (1999). The Death of the Sociology of Deviance?. Journal of Sociology, 35(1), 42.
Bienen, L. B. (1999). Just Revenge: Costa and Consequences of the Death Penalty. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 89(2), 751.
Hood, R. (1996). The Death Penalty A World-Wide Perspective (2nd ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Jury Sought in Death-Penalty Case; M Street Crew Member Accused of Killing 5 Charged under Federal Law. (2007, January 8). The Washington Times, p. B01.
Lang, S. S. (2004). Youth Violence and the Death Penalty: Book Explores Racial and Social Class Discrimination of Juvenile Death Penalty. Human Ecology, 31(3), 22.
Morgan, E. (2006, October 3). Crime and Punishment: Wrestling with the Death Penalty. The Christian Century, 123, 30+.
O'Shea, K. A. (1999). Women and the Death Penalty in the United States, 1900-1998. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Shortnacy, M. B. (2005). Sexual Minorities, Criminal Justice and the Death Penalty. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 32(2), 231+.
Steiker, C. S. (2005). No, Capital Punishment Is Not Morally Required: Deterrence, Deontology, and the Death Penalty. Stanford Law Review, 58(3), 751+.