| Never will the
time be more opportune than now for serious reflection
and discussion of capital punishment. The United
States of America now holds the dubious distinction
of being the world's leader in the area of homicides.
General interest in the death penalty has never
been greater than it is today as we witness the
vicious killings of individuals by fellow human
beings in almost every urban community in America.
Arguments in Favor of Capital Punishment
It has been said that "The right of administering
punishment is the right of the sovereign as the
supreme power to inflict pain upon a subject on
account of a crime committed by him." (Endres,
1985) This statement is at the foundation of all
arguments favoring capital punishment.
The proponents of capital punishment vigorously
support the imposition of death as a punishment
for heinous offenses. First, they raise the question
as to why law-abiding citizens have to suffer
at the hands of law breakers. Inasmuch as the
public is outraged and disgusted with violence
perpetrated against innocent victims and citizens,
it is perfectly legitimate for the State to express
this anger and vent this outrage by imposing capital
punishment. (Langan, 1993)
Second, it logically follows that retribution
and vengeance should be, and have long been, valid
purposes of the criminal justice system. If private
acts of vengeance (recent trends in New York suggest
that private citizens are now seeking vengeance
on their own) and vigilante groups are to be suppressed,
citizens must have some assurance that the State
will seek retribution on behalf of its citizens.
(Yoder, 1996)
Third, capital punishment serves as a general
deterrent to others who will come to realize what
will happen to them if they engage in this kind
of violent behavior. The argument here is that
although there is no empirical data to verify
the role of deterrence, those who claim that it
does not deter have the burden to prove their
position. It is further insisted that those with
that burden cannot themselves prove that it does
not deter. Moreover, as the proponents posit,
the death penalty serves as a special deterrent.
It is beyond dispute that the execution of the
offender is the most effective and certain method
by which the offender is incapacitated or prevented
from perpetrating additional crimes against society.
(Tushnet, 1989)
Fourth, the proponents of the death penalty argue
that the majority of people in this country support
capital punishment and America have always followed
the democratic notion of the majority and consensus
as a principle of operation. In support of this
argument they point out that approximately thirty-seven
state legislatures, representing most of the people
in this country, have enacted legislation to impose
capital punishment. Candidates for political office
campaign on that issue and are elected over those
who do not so favor. (Armstrong, 1966)
Fifth, proponents insist that biblical text supports
capital punishment, and, in fact, during the medieval
period even the Church recognized the right of
the State to execute for the common good. Lex
talionis, the Law of Retribution, they claim,
has long been the basis upon which the State is
authorized to protect and defend the common good
by using violent means to repel the vicious. (Bockle
& Pohier, 1979)
The retributive aspect of the proponents' position
has been often repeated by any number of authors.
The proponents believe that most of these murderers
never express regret for the heinous crimes they
commit, nor do they feel the slightest sympathy
for the victim or their families. The proponents
approve of the Supreme Court's recent attempts
to streamline, curtail, and quicken the appeal
mechanisms in order that the criminal justice
system can become better balanced toward providing
more justice to victims rather than always focusing
on expanding the rights for criminal defendants.
(Bedau, 1964)
Capital Punishment should be Reintroduced because….
Justice There are crimes of such gravity -- brutal
malicious killing, the rape and murder of children,
treason, terrorism, the murder of police -- to
which no other response seems adequate. To fail
to apply the death penalty in such cases is to
leave justice undone. Mass murderers frequently
turn their gun on themselves in implicit recognition
of the horror of their actions and the need to
atone for their guilt. We should insist that this
natural sense of retributive justice is reflected
in the law. (Kiefer & Munitz, 1968)
Threat to the Social Order Brutal crimes are a
violation of the moral order and a threat to the
social order. Retributive justice functions to
repair the social fabric. Without application
of the death penalty in cases of extreme attack
on the social order (which heinous crimes are)
social solidarity would be weakened. (Torok, 1974)
Deterrence While some criminologists and sociologists
have argued against the deterrence value of capital
punishment, recent econometric research provides
statistical support for the view that the death
penalty reduces the incidence of murder (Mishan,
p. 86-90). Commonsense, moreover, backs this view.
Death is the ultimate dread and the threat of
execution, as Samuel Johnson said, concentrates
the mind wonderfully.
Criminal Violence Without the death penalty criminals
become more brazen in their use of violent weapons.
If the criminal has already embarked on a crime
such as armed robbery which would earn him a long
term in prison, there is little disincentive to
resist the murder of a policeman who threatens
to apprehend him unless the penalty for such an
action is the loss of the criminal's own life.
The absence of such a disincentive also makes
police more reluctant in their apprehension of
potentially dangerous criminals. (Kiefer &
Munitz, 1968)
Vigilantes If public justice is seen to be inadequate,
it will give rise to private revenge. The common
perception that the legal system is too liberal
is reflected in the popularity of the Dirty Harry,
and Death Wish series of films. The United States
has experienced a marked increase in the incidence
of violent crime over the last two decades. This
has taken place against the background of a softening
of penalties. (Torok, 1974)
Recidivism Imprisonment is no guarantee that on
his release (or escape) a violent criminal will
not re-offend. Only when a convicted murderer
is executed can it be certain that he will commit
no further murders.
Waste of Money Keeping an evil felon in prison
for a life sentence is a waste of taxpayers' money
which could be better spent on crime prevention.
(Kiefer & Munitz, 1968)
|