Is it morally acceptable to execute murderous Yes, this is because it will prevent these criminals from engaging in this act again and the society will be safe from such dangerous individuals. The advantages of death penalty outweigh the disadvantages and the executioner is morally authorized to take the life of the murderous. Anti death punishment crusaders argue that killing is morally wrong, but what happens in a situation of self defense, should they also get the same kind of punishment When the issue of ethics is applied in death penalty, it makes the whole topic appear complex. (Bedau and Cassell, p. 234).
It is considered morally wrong to execute some one for murder however life imprisonment in well equipped prisons where the prisoners get free meals and families and friends visit regularly is not moral either. Although people will argue that prisons are not comfortable as described above, but this is the truth since criminal rights activists ensures that they are kept in a comfortable place and their rights protected. Forgetting about the conditions of the prisons, the right way for a murderer to pay for their wrong is through taking away their lives. If we opt for life imprisonment, is it going to be equivalent to loss of life We cannot afford to compare denial of freedom to losing ones life. Since punishment for wrongs like theft is by life imprisonment, then murder should get a harsher punishment than that since human life cannot be compared to material items or money (Ford, para. 5).
The criminals who are serving life imprisonment are supported by tax payers money. By sentencing murderous to life imprisonment, the families of the victims are among the tax payers who continue to pay for their well being. The prisoners may also decide to pursue courses which are offered at the prisons, the families of the victims will be supporting them indirectly. This is very unfair to the victims family and very far from the process of offering justice (Ford, para. 5).
Should we consider death penalty as revenge Death penalty cannot be considered as revenge because for it to qualify as revenge, it should be done by the victims family in the same manner in which their person was murdered. If the reason for state execution was revenge, then the criminals would be exposed to the same kind of treatment they gave to their victims before their death. The main purpose of death penalty is not making the murderer feel the same pain but to bring justice (Ford, para. 5).
In America, the murderous do not feel any pain when they are given death sentence. This is because the methods of execution used first of all render them unconscious before the lethal method is applied. For example, the most popular methods of execution are lethal injection and electric chair. As for lethal injection, thiopental sodium which is a sedative is first injected and this makes the person sleep, finally potassium chloride is injected which will cause cardiac arrest (Ford, para. 7). The immediate cause of death in this situation is respiratory and cardiac arrest. All these occur when the prisoner is a sleep. If we compare this manner of death to how murderous normally kill their victims, the short term pain which the murderous experience cannot be equated to the amount of suffering their victims underwent before they finally died (Caseys Critical Thinking, para. 9).
Arguments for death penalty
Fair or unfair application against the poor
Opponents of the death penalty have argued that it is applied unfairly on the poor. The main massage in this point is that death penalty is not applied fairly. This should not be the main reason for condemning death penalty. If death penalty is being applied unfairly then there is need to condemn all punishments. Saying that death penalty is being applied unfairly justifies its application in a fair manner. We should therefore not condemn death penalty but reform the justice system. If it is the system which is failing, then this calls for the fixation of the problem. It is not unfair that the blacks and the poor people get the punishment they deserve, but what should be unfair is that the rich and the white individuals escape the punishment they should get. The issue of biasness in passing death sentenced was ruled out in 2001 when the Justice Department found out that discrimination does not exist in the application of death penalty (Bedau and Cassell, p. 267).
Possibility of condemning innocent people
Before passing the sentence, the selected jury has to carry out all the possible investigation to confirm that the defendant was really involved in the crime. The probability of executing an innocent fellow is very minimal and chances of such errors occurring continue to reduce with advancement in forensic science. There are circumstances where death row prisoners have been freed but this does not mean that they were innocent. According to the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, retrial is not allowed after the sentence has been passed even if good evidence is found. If retrial was allowed, the convicts would be exposed to more trouble than they were in (Lasslett, para. 7).
Conviction can also be reversed on appeal in situations where evidence present is not sufficient to prove that the defendant was guilty and in such cases retrial is not allowed. The defendant cannot be said to be innocent in situations where the evidence brought against him are not enough. This kind of ruling indicates that the court failed to prove that the convict was guilty beyond reasonable doubts. There is need to know the difference between acquittal and innocence. The media participate actively in spreading the news of people convicted while innocent without clarifying whether the court failed to prove that the person was guilty beyond reasonable doubt or was innocent. Acquitted person is not innocent however the guilt cannot be established (American Civil Liberties Union, para. 4)
Death penalty as a deterrent against crime
Whether death penalty reduces the crime level or not should not be the concern, but should be viewed as an effective method of punishment which ensures that there is no repetition of the crime committed. The punishment is very effective since it ensures the death of the prisoner. Death penalty also serves as a deterrent since the executed murderer will never get involved in any criminal activity. Currently, there is no proof which have been brought forward of a person executed innocently, then we can conclude that the prisoners who escaped from the prisons or were released later murdered other innocent people. There are cases where released murderous later repeated the same crime. A good example is of 164 paroled Georgia murderous who were released. It is reported that 8 of them later committed murders within the first seven years of their release. Even those sentences to life imprisonment still commit murder. Federal prison officers have been reported to have been killed by murder criminals. If these murder criminals were executed, the lives of the prison officers and other inmates would have been saved (Bedau Cassell, p. 434).
Death penalty as cruel and unusual punishment
Death penalty has been described by anti death penalty crusaders as being brutal and a strange punishment. This cannot be true since it is supported by the constitution and there are laws put in place which guides it application. The constitution states that an individual should not be deprived of life without the due process of law. This law supports the use of death penalty and is recognized beyond doubt that it is not a cruel and strange punishment which is forbidden by the eighth amendment. The people who drafted the American constitution ensured that torture and other barbaric ways of punishment were prohibited (Acker, para. 4)
Murder is very different from other criminal acts like extortion, burglary or destruction of property and the kind of punishment offered for murder should also differ. The kind of punishment offered should consider the sacredness and self-respect of innocent human life. The kind of punishment given should be proportionate to the crime. Death penalty is moral and just since there will be no executions if murderous do not exist. Murderous are never innocent people but that their victims are. There is need to recognize that the rights of the victims are very important and should be protected (Lasslett, para. 10).
Arguments against death penalty
Death penalty is applied unfairly
Death penalty is applied discriminately against minority groups. The race of the defendants and that of the victims has an influence on the kind of punishment they get. Defendants from the minority groups most of the time get death penalty as compared to the whites. Although African Americans constitute 12 of the entire US population, 42 of the death row prisoners are blacks. In other states like Pennsylvania, 60 of death row prisoners are blacks. The statistics also reveal that very few number of whites have been executed for killing black people. Reports by Amnesty International further states that 20 of black defendants who received death penalty since 1976 were convicted by white juries. These are enough evidence to show that the lives of minority groups are not valued as those of their fellow whites therefore death penalty is not applied fairly (American Civil Liberties Union, para. 7).
Death penalty is meant for the poor
The wealthy people who can afford the best legal representation cannot end up in death row. Majority of defendants convicted of capital offences cannot afford the services of experienced attorneys to represent them. They are forced to use inexperienced and overworked lawyers. The time frame upon which capital trials are done is very short and do not give proper time to get a good defense. The trial results are also quite obvious since the economic status of the defendant determines the results (Kennedy, para. 3).
Innocent people get convicted wrongly
Many people have been released from death row sentences because they are innocent. The application of appeal bargains and leniency as alternative for snitch testimony most of the times result in innocent people being convicted of wrongs they did not commit. Police and prosecutors normally fail to carry out proper investigations which can prove the defendants to be innocent. A good example to illustrate this point is the incident of 2003 where all the states death row prisoners were released based on the fact that the justice system was flawed to an extent that it was difficult to know the guilty and the innocent. This case point at a possibility that many innocent people have been executed wrongly (Kennedy, para. 4).
Death penalty does not serve as a deterrent to crime
Over the years, research has been trying to prove that capital punishment reduces the level of crime. The research carried out has been criticized to have serious mistakes and omissions. The areas where many executions are carried are leading in crime levels. Since most murders are not planned, the murderers do not have the time to think about the consequences of their actions, therefore death penalty cannot serve as a deterrent against murder (Hinman, para. 5).
Evidence shows that death penalty does not act as a deterrent to crime. To prove this, a study was carried to estimate the level of crime in relation to the rate of execution in some states. The study proved that between the years 1989 to 2002 in the state of California, one execution was carried out, Texas had 239, and New York did not carry out any. When the patterns of murder rates were considered, they were found to be similar in each year, however Texas had the highest average. The study proved that as more executions are done, the rate of murder increase (Hinman, para. 6).
Death penalty is harsh and strange
In 2007, the process of executions was stopped in most states in America and the popularly used method of lethal injections was put under investigation. This came as a result of serious mistakes which the medical researchers found concerning the administration of the drugs. It was found that the injections were being administered in a wrong way which was leading to suffering of the prisoners being executed (Acker, para. 7).
The Christians take on death penalty
According to history, Christians were in support of capital punishment however in the recent years, many Christians have opposed death penalty arguing that Christianity should protect life. Christians base their arguments according to the teachings of the bible. According to Pope Innocent III, the secular power devoid of earthly sin can carry out judgment over life provided that the powers are used fairly. The Roman Catechism also issued a statement over death penalty in 1566. It stated that the power of life and death had been transferred by God to the civil authorities. The power transferred was not to be used to murder, but to show respect to Gods laws. The law of Vatican City from 1929 to 1969 accepted death penalty for any individual who attempts to assassinate the pope (Caseys Critical Thinking, para. 12).
A research which was conducted in the US in 1990 revealed that the churches which believe that the bible is the word of God like the Protestants were more likely to support death penalty as compared to other religious groups and churches.
Christians arguments in support of death penalty
Religious groups which support death penalty base their arguments on the teachings of the bible. It is stated in the bible in the book of Genesis Chapter 9 Verses 6 that whoever kills a fellow man should be punished by death. According to the Old Testament, death penalty is believed to have been created by God. The Old Testament has a list of capital offences which include crimes like idolatry, murder, blasphemy, and magic (American Civil Liberties Union, para. 10)
In the New Testament, there is the most popular execution in the history of mankind and that is crucifixion of Jesus Christ who was accused of blasphemy. The main message in the New Testament is about forgiveness and the authority of the state to take someones life is not supported. In the book of Mathew 72 it is stated that whatever you do to others will be done to you. What is not coming out clear is whether the action will be taken by God or the state. Although Jesus was teaching about peace throughout his life, there is no any incident in which he condemned death penalty or even barred the authorities from carrying out executions (Ballard, para. 6).
Christians who support death penalty do so basing their arguments on the fact that the state carry out executions not from their power but from the power of God vested in them. It is God Almighty who has power over life and death. St. Augustine supported this fact by stating that the divine law which prohibits killing of humans allows some exceptions in situations where God allows killing by general law or when He gives a clear charge to an individual for a short period. Christians in favor of capital punishment argue that by choosing to commit murder is like committing suicide. This is because when caught by the authority you will pay the offence with your own life. In cases of execution, the state cannot be said to have denied a murderer his life, but the murderer himself disposed his right to life (Acker, para. 8).
Christians arguments in opposing death penalty
Christians usually argue that only God can take away the life a person. This argument is mostly used to condemn abortion and euthanasia by doctors. Christians believe that according to Gods commandment, one should not kill. They take life to be sacred therefore there should not be any excuse to killing be it by state or not. It does not matter how serious the crime one might have committed, life should not be taken away (Marshall, para. 5).
The bible authorizes death penalty for murder and also for some other listed capital offences. Some of the offences listed in the bible are no longer punishable by death. This calls for the need to remove death penalty. There are also other types of punishment which were never there during the biblical times and they serve as better bets for death penalty. The teaching of Christianity also puts much emphasis on forgiveness and compassion and capital punishment is not in line with these teachings (Marshall, para. 6).
Some groups of Christians argue that in countries where capital punishment is used, it is the poor who usually end up in death rows. This happens because they cannot afford to hire experienced lawyers. According to the teachings of Christianity, Christians should support the poor. Christians believe that life should be supported and cannot support death penalty since it fails to support life. The Christians stand for life is mostly applied in cases against abortion and euthanasia, but it should be extended to death penalty (Ballard, para. 8).
The application of ethics in the debate on death penalty results in justification of death penalty. Ethics is all about right and wrong and considering the consequences of the action you are about to take. It is upon the criminals to decide whether they value their lives or not. As much as there are various types of punishment which also differ in their severity, the kind of punishment passed to an offender should be equivalent to the crime committed. Murder criminals deserve death penalty as this ensures justice to the victim and his family members. Death penalty has also proved to be 100 deterrent to criminals.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment