One of the primary arguments in favor of the death penalty is based on the notion that capital punishment serves as a deterrent to crime. While it is
true that we cannot know how many people decided not to commit murder, because they feared being put to death, we do have statistics showing the
increase/decrease of violent crimes in non-death penalty states vs. death penalty states:
As executions rose, states without the death penalty fared much better than states with the death penalty in reducing their murder rates. The
gap between the murder rate in death penalty states and the non-death penalty states grew larger (as shown in Chart II). In 1990, the murder rates in
these two groups were 4% apart. By 2000, the murder rate in the death penalty states was 35% higher than the rate in states without the death
penalty. In 2001, the gap between non-death penalty states and states with the death penalty again grew, reaching 37%. For 2002, the number stands
at 36%. www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...
If you look at the graphs on the above link, is should be fairly obvious that the crime deterrent argument doesn't really hold much water.
Next, put yourself into the shoes of one of the 113 former death row inmates who have been exonerated since 1973. You can read a brief explanation of
each of their stories
here
How many more innocent people do you think have been killed by the state because of corruption, dishonesty, apathy or predjudice? Who should pay
the price for the wrongful taking of an innocent life at the hands of the state? Doesn't the family of such a person deserve the same chance at
revenge for the murder of their loved one as anyone else? How can there be any exuse or justification for the taking of an innocent human being's
life? You can't give back someone's life, once you have chosen to play God, and taken it.
As of February 2004, 113 inmates had been found innocent and released from death row. More than half of these have been released in the last
10 years. That means one person has been exonerated for every eight people executed.
A study by Columbia University professor James Liebman examined thousands of capital sentences that had been reviewed by courts in 34 states from 1973
to 1995. “An astonishing 82 percent of death row inmates did not deserve to receive the death penalty,” he said in his conclusion. “One in twenty
death row inmates is later found not guilty.”
In many other cases, it was good fortune rather than the criminal justice system that established innocence. In several cases, college or law school
students investigated cases and unearthed essential evidence. For example, students in an investigative journalism class at Webster University
uncovered evidence of misconduct by prosecutors, who talked a witness into giving false testimony and withheld crucial trial evidence, and helped get
a new trial for Louisiana death row inmate Richard Clay.
Although there has been much attention surrounding the use of DNA testing, only 13 death row inmates of 113 have been exonerated by use of DNA.
www.aclu.org...
It is a given that our current penetentiaries are a joke. Prisoners are treated to luxuries, such as cable tv, while law-abiding citizens must pay
for it. There is no question, that we are in serious need of a prison overhaul. If it were up to me, prisons would be self-sufficient, i.e., grow
their own food, generate their own electricity, etc., and non-violent non-lifers would be given mandatory counseling and education. Violent
prisoners, sentenced to life, should be thrown on an uninhabited and remotely guarded island in the middle of nowhere, and alllowed to fend for
themselves. Taxpayers should not be expected to pay for the maintenance of those who have committed wrongs against them.
That being said, the fact that our prisons and criminal justice systems need to be overhauled, isn't a valid justification for the state-santioned
killing of our fellow humans. How can we expect to be taken seriously when we say, "Thou shalt not kill" if we follow up by saying "unless the
government wants you to"?
To take another man's life is not a trivial thing, even when the condemned has done something horrific.
Has anyone ever stopped and thought about what the psychological effects might be on those who are responsible for actually taking the prisoner's
life? What type of person could remain unaffected by such duties? How much value do you think they place on human life? If a man in charge of
executing prisoners, were to secretly enjoy the taking of another man's life, wouldn't he just be a glorified serial killer, operating with the
government's blessings? Does the fact that he is provided with his victims, rather than having to select his own, make this ok?
I have several other reasons why capital punishment is wrong, but this is all I will write for now.
