Lincoln Caplan's Article: A Strong Argument Against Capital Punishment

When it comes to punishing criminals, people have a variety of ideas-especially when murder becomes a part of the discussion. Although there are plenty of options proposed, from torture to life in prison, one of the most debated methods is the death penalty. The death penalty, defined simply, is the practice of allowing the imposition of death as a punishment for those convicted of certain crimes, usually murder. While thirty-one states allow capital punishment, an argument that has been raging since the early 1970s is still going on. There are many aspects of the argument, but the two main groups involved in the argument are those in favor of the death penalty, and those opposed. Supporters of capital punishment typically believe that society

In his article “A Strong Argument Against Capital Punishment”, Caplan supports the idea that it is time to end the death penalty in the U.S.. Caplan supports this idea through the Connecticut Supreme Court’s ruling on the death penalty being unconstitutional, and quotes from Justice Richard N. Palmer, who wrote up the opinion. Caplan first claims that the Supreme Court saw a history of unfairness in capital punishment, quoting Palmer’s statement that “What has not changed is that, throughout every period of our state’s history, the death penalty has been imposed disproportionately on those whom society has marginalized socially, politically, and economically: people of color, the poor and uneducated, and unpopular immigrant and ethnic groups”. Caplan also says the death penalty is unnecessary as a punishment, once again quoting Palmer, who said, “The legislature necessarily has made a determination that he who lives by the sword need not die by it; that life imprisonment without the possibility of release is an adequate and sufficient penalty even for the most horrific of crimes; and that we can express our moral outrage, mete out justice, bring some measure of solace to the families of the victims, and purge the blemish of murder on our community whilst the offender yet lives”. Caplan also cites a study of every murder case in Connecticut from 1973 to 2003, which found

In his article “Execution Saves Innocents…” Jacoby claims the death penalty may not be applied one hundred percent infallibly, but that the death penalty is still the most accurately administered criminal sanction. Jacoby first states that mistakes in the death penalty may occur, but “no worthwhile human endeavor is utterly foolproof”. He then states that capital punishment is the best possible way to seek justice for victims of heinous crimes, and that execution sends a “powerful moral message”. Jacoby also states that, “When a vicious killer is sent to the electric chair or strapped onto a gurney for a lethal injection, society is condemning his crime with a seriousness and intensity that no other punishment achieves. By contrast, a society that sentences killers to nothing worse than prison -- no matter how depraved the killing or how innocent the victim -- is a society that doesn 't really think murder is so terrible”. On top of this, Jacoby cites a study from the University of Colorado, which found a “a statistically significant relationship between executions, pardons, and homicide. Specifically, each additional execution reduces homicides by five to six”, as well as a paper by three Emory University economists saying, “Our results suggest that capital punishment has a strong deterrent effect. . . . In particular, each execution results, on average, in 18 fewer murders --