An Argument Essay for Assignment 1 - informative,analytical and/or argumentative

- Argumentative Writing -
Capital Punishment is Barbaric and Immoral



Capital Punishment has been around since the beginning of history. It has been used as a form of punishment for people who have committed murder, rape, or serious crimes “against humanity”. It has been used for so long that many people have come to accept it as a normal and justifiable practice. Many people also believe that capital punishment is a deterrent to violent crime and an acceptable method of obtaining vengeance. Yet it is far from acceptable. Strapping a human beings to an electric chair and cooking them, placing a living person in a gas chamber to suffocate, breaking a person’s neck by hanging at the end of a rope, or blindfolding and then shooting 19 year old boy soldiers by firing squad are not normal, nor are they justified. The government has no right to kill. The proverb: “an eye for an eye” is usually the justification used for this kind of killing. That sounds simple, but it is not. It is difficult when we must decide who should die and how they should die. Capital punishment is almost never administered fairly and many, many innocent people have been executed, as a result of poor representation, faulty evidence, and simple bias. Many condemned prisoners suffer greatly before they die, a result of long prison time and faulty techniques or methods of execution. The decision to execute or not to execute is usually determined by the convicted person’s ability to pay for a good lawyer. The decision to execute usually applies if the convicted come from the wrong place, the wrong religion, or the wrong ethnic group.

The European Union opposes the death penalty in all cases. It considers that “the abolition of the death penalty contributes to the enhancement of human dignity and progressive development of human rights”. On the other hand, there are two so called “civilized” countries that consider themselves progressive which have the death penalty: Japan and the United States. Of the 50 individual states within the United States, 37 actively enforce the death penalty. The danger of convicting and killing an innocent man or woman with the death penalty plagues the death row system in these states, and is one of the most compelling arguments against the death penalty today. There are over 75 documented cases of wrongful convictions of murder in the last 100 years in the United States of America. “Pardons” which were issued after the fact to these 75 documented cases are worthless. Pardons can’t bring back those killed; the state can’t bring them back to life. Between 1973 and 2003, there were at least 107 death row inmates in 25 different states, who have been found to be innocent and released at the last minute. Of these 107 found innocent, 1/3 of them had been in jail for at least 7 years. What if they had been killed? There is no second chance if a mistake is made when death is the punishment, just more grim statistics. Many supporters of the death penalty believe that these numbers are a very small percentage of miscarried justices, and many believe that it is a sacrifice our society needs to make in order to carry out the law. Better to have a few innocent die, than let murderers live. How can one claim that this is a justified sacrifice? All lives should be valued, and if our justice system were fair, no innocent lives should have to be sacrificed. As former Governor Ryan (of Illinois) said on the 11th of January, 2003 before commuting the capital sentences of all death row inmates (164 people) to life in prison without parole: “If we have had so many instances where we have not convicted the right person, how can any of us be sure that our death penalty sentencing process is any better?” Just a month before this governor made this speech, four men previously convicted of murder were released because they were innocent of charges. After being on death row for 17 years, Anthony Porter, in the late 1990’s, was found innocent because of research done by law students working with their professor and a private investigator.

The 8th Amendment of the U.S. constitution condemns “cruel and unusual punishment”. Does this amendment not apply here? When the state condemns someone to death row, and carries out the death penalty, the state is lowered to the level of the murderers. If killing is wrong, then when the state executes someone it is also committing a wrong. Execution is hypocritical. The state has no right to play God when it decides who should live or die. One of the 10 commandments of the Christian faith says: ”Thou shall not kill”. This must apply to a justice system, which claims to base its laws on Christian precepts. This must apply if we are to live in a true, fair, society. Many people do argue that the state is an exception, and that it has to the right, and power, to judge without being judged itself. Why should the state be an exception? The state should be a role model not an exception, not a killing machine. It should not use death to punish any crime. As George H. Ryan said: “There is no honourable way to kill”, and State is not being honourable when killing. The methods of execution used in the United States are not only immoral, but also very barbaric, yet the United States is viewed as one of the most civilized countries and is an outspoken critic of other countries for their lack of human rights. The legalized methods kill in the USA vary from state to state. These methods include lethal injection, electrocution via the electric chair, firing squad, hanging, and in a few states, the gas chambers. In some cases, the death can be long and painful; with the electric chair, there have been many cases where the victim caught fire, and burned to death. Four men claimed to have been tortured by police into giving confessions under the direction of the, then, Chicago Police Commander, Jon Burge. When investigations followed, evidence was found to prove physical abuse had been used to get confessions out of the suspects.jj

The death penalty goes strongly against the moral principles in our society. Two wrongs do not make a right, and the end does not justify the means, are taught to our young children from a very early age. The State killing a man because he murdered someone is unfair, and does not bring the person murdered back to life. This system is a way of revenge for those who have lost a loved one. It is true that the act of murder is not moral, and many believe that morality should not be a part of the punishment, since the murderer sacrificed morals when he killed. The result of saying that morality should not be considered will lead us anarchy. Lack of morality will eventually become chaos. As Gandhi said: “An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.”

The U.S. Justice systems are far from fair. The Supreme Court Justice Potter Steward said: “The imposition of the death penalty on defendants in the United States is as freakish and arbitrary as who gets hit by a bolt of lightening.” The death penalty is not enforced evenly throughout the states, which have it. People that are less privileged economically or socially are more likely to die since they are not able to defend themselves as well. The quality of legal representation is the main factor, which will decide whether or not someone will be sentenced to death or not. Whether or not someone will die in most cases depends on whether or not that person can hire a lawyer. Almost all people on the death row were unable to afford to hire a qualified attorney. In many cases, government-appointed attorneys have actually fallen asleep during the trial. Another huge factor, which affects the death sentence, is where the person is tried. In some cases it is more of a factor than the actual circumstance of the crime. Of the 71 people executed in 13 states (in the U.S.A) in 2002, 33 of them were in Texas, while only 1 was executed in the state of California. There have been many cases of withheld evidence, and lack of DNA testing, but still the accused is sentenced to death. Race also plays a great part in the determining of whether the accused will die. In the United States, 81% of death sentences involve white victims. One hundred and seventy-eight black people have been executed for killing a white person, whereas only 12 white people have been executed for killing a black person. Forty-three percent of all death row inmates are black, even though African Americans only constitute for 12% of the US population. Around 358 Hispanic inmates account for 11% of the inmates with a known ethnicity.

Proponents of capital punishment claim that it lowers crime rates, saves lives of innocent people, and that it is a deterrent to would-be murderers. However, there is strong evidence against this argument. In the United States, in 1957, there were 8,060 murders, and 65 executions. In 1982, there were 22000 murders. The number of murders did not decline as the proponents claimed. This is the same throughout the various states in the U.S. Texas is one of the states with the most murders per year, and yet it is one of the states with the most annual executions. Minnesota, however, is a state with some of the least murders, and it does not have capital punishment. The average murder rate per 100,000 people in U.S. states with capital punishment is around 8, whereas it is only 4.4 in abolitionist states. Also, the higher execution rates actually result in an increase in violent crime, such as was the case in New York, between 1907 and 1964. In the 57 years, 692 executions were carried out, and on average, one or more executions in a given month added to an increase of 2 murders the next month.

Many people deem capital punishment justifiable and acceptable, and in some European countries, like Britain, there are many people who are asking for it to be reinstated. Quotes from the bible are often used to justify their views, such as the famous maxim: “An eye for an eye”. Again, it is better to remember Gandhi’s words “An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind”. The issue of Capital Punishment remains a difficult issue and one that will always spark sharp debate and opinions among people. However, when looking at the evidence; it is administered arbitrarily and unfairly, it fails to deter crime and improve public safety and it is the ultimate denial of civil liberties.