Introduction
Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, is a controversial topic in America that has sparked intense debates among scholars, policymakers, and citizens. The practice of executing offenders who commit certain heinous crimes predates the American Revolution. Currently, Capital punishment is authorized in 27 states by the federal government and the U.S. military (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2021).
Capital punishment laws exist in 28 states that allow for the execution of convicted individuals through various legal mechanisms, including lethal injection and electrocution. Despite its widespread use in America’s criminal justice system, many people hold diverging opinions on capital punishment. While some believe it serves as a deterrent to violent crime and promotes social justice by providing retribution for victims’ families, others argue that it violates human rights principles and risks miscarriages of justice, given its potential impact on vulnerable populations such as minorities or those with low-income backgrounds. This essay provides an overview of both sides of the debate surrounding capital punishment in America in the form of deterrence and retribution.
History
“Capital punishment refers to the process of sentencing convicted offenders to death for the most serious crimes (capital crimes) and carrying out that sentence. The specific offenses and circumstances that determine if a crime is eligible for a death sentence are defined by statute and are prescribed by Congress or any state legislature” (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2021).
Capital punishment was first used in the Code of Hammurabi, a collection of laws compiled in ancient Babylon in roughly 1754 BC (Crime Museum). Other ancient civilizations, such as the Greeks and Romans, utilized capital punishment for various offenses. In the Middle Ages, capital punishment grew tremendously in Europe, notably for crimes such as heresy, witchcraft, and blasphemy.
During the 18th and 19th centuries, capital punishment was widely used in England, with over 200 crimes punishable by death, including theft and forgery. Public executions were also a prevalent method of discipline. The initial versions of capital punishment were meant to be slow, unpleasant, and excruciating. Lawbreakers were executed in certain ancient societies by being stoned to death, crucified, burned at the stake, or even slowly crushed by elephants. Later organizations searched for more humane kinds of punishment since they perceived these techniques as being harsh and uncommon.
Since the founding of the original colonies, capital punishment has been used in the United States for a variety of crimes, including burglary, murder, treason, counterfeiting, and arson. Legislators in the United States began to study and amend rules underlying the death sentence around the time of the American Revolution. In 1791, the Constitution was updated for the eighth time to outlaw any form of punishment considered “cruel and unusual.”
Although this was not an attempt to abolish capital punishment, it did initiate a movement toward more humane executions. In order to attain this goal, Thomas Edison’s employees created the electric chair in the late 1800s. The United States Supreme Court declared capital punishment unconstitutional in 1972 due to the case Furman v. Georgia (Litardo, 1994).
Arguments For Capital Punishment
“Deterrence is probably the most commonly expressed rationale for capital punishment.” The effectiveness of capital punishment as a crime deterrent is a hotly discussed topic around the world. Capital punishment supporters contend that the possibility of execution deters potential criminals from committing horrific crimes, while opponents claim that there is no evidence to support this assertion.
According to numerous studies, capital punishment can be a crime deterrent. For example, according to a 2007 research published in the Journal of Applied Economics, each execution deters an average of 18 homicides. Another study, published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology in 2010, discovered a significant negative association between the U.S. execution rate and the murder rate.
There is, however, research that implies the reverse. According to a 2012 National Research Council report, there is no solid evidence to support the argument that the death sentence deters crime. Similarly, a 2018 Brennan Center for Justice research found no substantial evidence that the death sentence had a significant impact on crime rates. Furthermore, opponents of capital punishment argue that other factors, such as socioeconomic conditions and access to mental health treatment, are more important than the threat of capital punishment in reducing crime rates.
Capital punishment is frequently rationalized as a sort of retributive justice in which the perpetrator is punished proportionally to the crime committed. Capital punishment supporters say that it provides closure for victims’ families and acts as a deterrent to potential criminals. One of the critical grounds for capital punishment as retributive justice is that it gives the victim’s family and society as a whole a sense of closure. The execution of the culprit is viewed as a means of administering justice and vengeance for the crime committed, as well as offering closure and pleasure to the victim’s family and friends. This sense of closure is especially vital in circumstances when the crime was very horrific, such as murder.
Another justification for capital punishment is that it gives the victims and their relatives a sense of revenge. For the most egregious crimes, including murder, the death sentence is seen to be a proportionate punishment that will guarantee that justice is done. The use of capital punishment is also seen to demonstrate the gravity of the crime committed and the worth of human life.
The victim’s relatives may feel vindicated and satisfied with the capital punishment. Many homicide victims’ families believe that the murderer should be executed in order to give their loved one a feeling of justice. The execution of the offender is seen to be the best means to ensure that the harshness of the punishment they receive for their crime is appropriate.
Despite popular belief, some proponents of the death penalty assert that it is occasionally less expensive than a sentence of life in prison without the chance of release. While keeping a prisoner on death row usually costs more than keeping other prisoners, the lengthy appeals process connected with capital cases may end up costing more money. Additionally, proponents assert that the death penalty is more affordable than life in prison and provides a longer-lasting solution.
Finally, proponents of capital punishment argue that it gives the families of murder victims a feeling of finality. The great way to guarantee that justice is served and that the harshness of the penalty corresponds with the gravity of the criminal’s actions is to execute the offender. Some families might believe that justice has not been fully served without the death sentence and that the offender has not been made to answer for their misdeeds.
Arguments Against Capital Punishment
The possibility of killing an innocent person is one of the strongest arguments against capital punishment. There have been many instances where innocent persons have been wrongfully accused and condemned to death, despite the precautions put in place to guarantee that only the guilty receive capital punishment. The likelihood of this type of injustice is a strong argument against the death sentence.
Another argument against capital punishment is that it disproportionately affects weaker groups, especially minorities and those from low-income families. According to the study, defendants of color are more likely than white defendants to get a death sentence, and capital punishment is frequently applied as a form of social control rather than as a punishment for crimes (Heyns & Viljoen, 2021). The death sentence is not a fair or reasonable punishment, and this is a blatant breach of human rights norms.
The discussion of capital punishment also heavily weighs ethical and moral issues. Many individuals feel that taking someone’s life, even if they have committed a terrible crime, is ethically wrong. This argument is frequently supported by religious or philosophical convictions on the value of life and the necessity of forgiving others and finding redemption in society.
Another repeatedly mentioned objection to the death sentence is how expensive it is. Due to the additional legal resources needed, such as the requirement for a second trial in the case of a death sentence, capital penalty trials are often more expensive than non-capital punishment trials (Heyns & Viljoen, 2021). Additionally, because the appeals process can drag on for years, the cost of maintaining inmates on death row is higher than that of other prisoners.
Finally, those who oppose capital punishment contend that even individuals who have committed the most horrific crimes are capable of forgiveness and rehabilitation. Contrarily, the death sentence prevents people from making apologies and improving society. Alternative kinds of punishment can provide both punishment and the potential for restoration and atonement, such as life in prison without the chance of release or restorative justice initiatives (Heyns & Viljoen, 2021). The risk of murdering innocent individuals, the disproportionate effect on disadvantaged communities, ethical and moral concerns, the exorbitant expense, and the possibility of rehabilitation and redemption are a few of the strong arguments against the use of capital punishment. When assessing the use of capital punishment in the criminal justice system in America, these arguments must be carefully taken into account.
The fact that capital punishment does not sufficiently address the underlying causes of crime is another argument in opposition to it. A sense of vengeance or retribution may be felt following the execution of a criminal, but the underlying social, economic, and psychological causes of criminal conduct are not addressed. Many of those who commit crimes do so as a result of systemic problems, including poverty, illiteracy, mental illness, or other issues. Executing these people does not deal with these fundamental problems or offer a sustainable way to lower crime rates (Heyns & Viljoen, 2021). Resources should be used to address the underlying issues that contribute to crime and implement restorative justice procedures that put an emphasis on making amends and mending rifts between offenders and their communities. Instead of only penalizing offenders after the fact, society may strive towards reducing crime before it occurs by addressing these underlying concerns.
Capital punishment is also rejected because it runs counter to the concept of restorative justice. Restorative justice emphasizes making apologies for the harm caused as a result of the crime rather than merely punishing the offender. If the offender receives the death penalty, they will have no opportunity to apologize to the victim or make restitution to society (Heyns & Viljoen, 2021). Additionally, it promotes the idea that the primary goals of the criminal justice system should be punishment rather than rehabilitation and fostering peace. Restorative justice initiatives have proven effective in reducing recidivism rates and promoting healing for both victims and offenders, making them a kinder and valuable way to handle criminal justice issues.
Conclusion
The controversial subject of capital punishment, sometimes referred to as capital punishment, is discussed in general in this article. The essay discusses both arguments for and against capital punishment in America, with a focus on discipline and deterrence. Arguments in favor of capital punishment include its power to discourage crime, its capacity to offer comfort to the families of victims, and the feeling of justice it can engender. Additionally, supporters claim that it can be less expensive than life in prison and that it provides families with a sense of closure. Opponents, however, highlight the danger of killing innocent people, the disproportionate effect on communities that are already vulnerable, ethical and moral considerations, the exorbitant expense, and the potential for redemption and rehabilitation.
The paper also discusses alternatives to the death sentence, such as life in prison without the possibility of release, restorative justice, and rehabilitation programs, as well as a historical review of capital punishment and its use in various nations. The article concludes by examining recent changes in the usage of the death sentence in America, societal perceptions and political issues, the use of technology, and future changes and improvements to the existing procedure.
Reference
Heyns, C., & Viljoen, F. (Eds.). (2021). The impact of the United Nations human rights treaties on the domestic level. Brill.