Capital punishment is feared by potential murderers because once it is ordered on them they are not coming back. When those potential murderers are deterred away form murder, those are innocent lives that are saved. Further, if we get rid of capital punishment we will just be showing criminals that they can get away with murder, and be punished that severely.
There are chances that the system might convict an innocent citizen. There is no way to mend the mistakes we make. “‘We’re only humans, we all make mistakes,”’ (“Capital Punishment”) is a frequently used expression, but is it as true as anything can be. Therefore, the fact that there is a chance of an innocent life to be condemned to death should be enough to abolish the death penalty, but it is not enough for our government. Additionally, according to Amnesty International “‘the death penalty legitimizes an irreversible act of violence by the state and will inevitably claim innocent victims.”’(“Capital Punishment”).
Instead families feelings are remorsefully saddened for executions. Over and over studies have shown that the death penalty does not work as deterrence to crime. And costs are so driven up by death penalty cases. Ultimately the death penalty is a permanent death consent. Why murder others for murders?
There should be no doubt that the death penalty is an expensive, brutal, and ineffective deterrent to crime. Though there isn’t much evidence that proves the death penalty deters crime, there is plenty of evidence and studies that prove it does not. The latest FBI Uniform Crime Report shows that in 2000, the national murder rate decreased 3.1 % from 1999, with the smallest decline in the South. The South remains the region with the highest murder rate, 6.8 victims per 100,000, compared to 5.1 in the West and Midwest, and 4.0 in the Northeast. Since the death penalty was reinstated, over 80% of all executions have occurred in the South, the region with the highest murder rate.
There is no question that killing another person is the most atrocious criminal act that one can commit. I am not sure why, but it seems that the United States government is being hypocritical when it says that capital punishment is acceptable because a criminal did murder an innocent victim, and therefore should be killed (Philips, 2013). This is rule is known as the "eye-for-an-eye, and tooth-for-a- tooth theory." Of course, if we used this system all the time, there would be no need for laws. A second argument that some people use to support capital punishment is that the fear of being given the death penalty is going to stop criminals from murdering.
The supporters claim that the death penalty will eliminate criminals and that these offenders will not be around to repeat any future crimes. Legally, criminals should be "innocent until proven guilty;” but in reality, they are often accused to be "guilty until proven innocent.” However, the abolitionists argue that innocent people have been mistakenly placed on death row and executed because of the flaws in the current criminal justice system. Amnesty International discovered that “innocent people may be sentenced to death through judicial error” ("Evidence Against Death Penalty”). As a result, tragedies are irreversible. An innocent victim by the name of “Steven Truscott was wrongly convicted of murder… It was horrible for Truscott and the victim 's family because the real culprit got away with murder” (Wheeler).
Many people who have been killed by capital punishment have later been found innocent, but the penalty is irreversible and goes against peoples’ rights and beliefs. The death penalty should not be used as a deterrent to lower murder rates because it does not serve its purpose in deterring crime and murder rates, it costs an unaffordable amount of money, the deaths are sometimes long and painful, innocent people are murdered, and it is outright immoral.
Capital punishment has as its aim not only the punishment of criminals but also the prevention of similar crimes. Unfortunately, capital punishment does not in fact deter criminal acts, as most supporters of the death penalty expect. Michael Meltsner points out that "capital punishment was justified as a deterrent to crime, yet the killing [has been] done infrequently and in privacy" (3); these factors lead to the ineffectiveness of capital punishment as a deterrent. The infrequent administration of capital punishment stems from the vast differences in each case and the legal variations among the states that permit capital punishment. Currently, t... ... middle of paper ... ...ne, no matter how heinous the crime.
Recently in the United States, there has been 875 prisoners executed, but not one has been proven innocent. The death penalty provides justice to the families involved in the worst crimes (Jacoby). “The execution of a murderer sends a powerful moral message: that the innocent life he t... ... middle of paper ... ...es, but we do not tear the lighthouse down’” (qtd. by Sharp “Death Penalty Paper”). We believe that the death penalty should be enforced because it can be used as a way to put fear into criminals and decrease the murder rate throughout the world.
In the 29 states that have a sentence of life without parole, 23 have statutes that bar judges from letting jurors know they have that sentencing option. Since studies consistently show that when given a choice between a death sentence and a sentence of life without parole, most people will choose the latter, failure to inform a jury of this alternative is tantamount to sending more people to the execution chamber. Social science research has discredited the claim that execution deters murder. The majority of murders are committed in the heat of passion, and/or under the influence of alcohol or drugs, when there is little thought given to the possible consequences of the act. "Hit men" and other murderers who plan their crimes beforehand, intend and expect to avoid punishment altogether by not getting caught.