The Death Penalty Should Be Abolished

Elliot Spitzer states, “Our criminal justice system is fallible. We know it, even though we don 't like to admit it. It is fallible despite the best efforts of most within it to do justice. And this fallibility is, at the end of the day, the most compelling, persuasive, and winning argument against a death penalty.” Although the Death Penalty is meant to kill the ones that have murdered, many innocent people have been executed due to the ignorance of facts during trial. Since this has come to me and my partner’s attention, we are resolved that The United States should change its penal code to abolish the death penalty. The Death Penalty is execution following someone’s conviction of murder or any other serious crime. Abolish is to end the observance or effect of. The Penal Code is a set of criminal laws of a particular country, society, etc. Our courts are not steady, which is why we need to abolish the death penalty.

From the statistics used by Mulhausen in the article, “How the Death Penalty Saves Lives”, it seems that the goals of the death penalty were achieved to begin with, but since then it looks as if the death penalty threat is no longer a threat at all. In observing statistics provided to us by the Death Penalty Information Center, since 1990, murder rates have steadily declined; a very good sign for the nation as a whole. What interests me about the statistics is that even when the numbers were just beginning to be taken in 1990, the murder rates in states that do not enforce the death penalty are lower than those in states that do. This observation is very significant in correspondence to the debate regarding the effectiveness and need, or lack thereof, of the death penalty. The numbers back up my claim that the death penalty is not the best method. You cannot make the case that the death penalty itself is destroying crime because the states without the penalty have a declining crime rate, or the case that it destroys crime at a higher or faster rate because the numbers tell a different story. It cannot conclusively or confidently be said that the death penalty does not destroy crime whatsoever, but the facts of the matter do inspire doubt in my mind. Criminals who know they are likely to face death, if caught, are more willing to commit crimes than criminals who know for a fact that the death penalty is not, and cannot be invoked upon them if caught and convicted. This tells me one of two things: the criminals committing these crimes in death penalty states are so good at what they do, they do not fear getting caught, or that these criminals know even if they do get convicted and sentenced to death they are getting the easy way out. These death row convicts do not have to go to prison and suffer

“A recent study by Professor Michael Radelet and Traci Lacock of the University of Colorado found that 88% of the nation’s leading criminologists do not believe the death penalty is an effective deterrent to crime. The study, Do Executions Lower Homicide Rates? The Views of Leading Criminologists, published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Crimonology, concluded, “There is overwhelming consensus among America’s top criminologists that the empirical research conducted on the deterrence question fails to support the threat or use of the death penalty.” A previous study in 1996 had come to similar conclusions.”

I would like about whether or not the United States should abolish the death penalty. The United States should not abolish this because those who commit a capital felony which is punishable by imprisonment or death, should serve a capital punishment which is the death penalty. Many believe that certain crimes such as rape and murder should punishable by the death penalty. Although many also see it as inhumane, many also view murder and rape as inhumane. One can view this as part of Hammburi’s Code law that states “An eye for an eye.” Capital punishment has ben around for thousands of years; beginning even before the ancient Greeks and Romans. At that time, there were many different ways to carry out capital punishment such as, beheading, stoning and electrocution (PBS).

All of the research that I have done suggests that the death penalty is not a major source of deterrence for criminals to commit severe crimes such as homicide. In a 2009 survey of America’s top criminologists, published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology and written by Professor Michael Radelet, eighty-eight percent of the expert criminologists stated that they do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent for criminals to commit homicide. Respondents to this survey were asked to base their answers on research, rather

Those that are for the death penalty claim that it will serve as a deterrent and is the only way for retribution against murderers. Both issues are highly debatable and have even been a subject of criticism. Punishment as a deterrence has been used for ages. This concept does work, however it should not be applied to all criminals, in my opinion. Some pro capital punishment individuals claim that it is an efficient deterrence against criminals. In an article “Death penalty is a deterrence”, the authors claim that by practicing the death penalty, violent crimes will decrease.”violent crime has declined eleven percent, with murder showing the largest decline at even more than twenty two percent. We believe that this has occurred in part because of the strong signal that the death penalty sent to violent criminals and murders.” These statistics taken from this article may be inaccurate and should be closely examined.

Some of the arguments in support of death penalty are it decreases the chance of crime rate. In absence of death penalty there is higher chance of increase in crime rate. According to the time magazine, an estimated two hundred thousand people in United States have been victims of some kind of crimes. With not proper law criminals will feel more free to commit heinous crimes. To secure the community and create a sense of fear in criminals to commit horrible crimes, there is a need for death penalty.

A study conducted by the Journal of Quantitative Criminology reveals that for every execution performed, fifteen murders take its place (Durlauf, et al). The study compiled execution statistics and murder rates across states in order to determine the efficacy of deterrence. Granted, executions do not directly lead to murders, but the data exposes the fact that the death penalty has not been successful in preventing them. In fact crime rates increase in states that resume the practice of the death penalty. For example, Florida had a twenty-eight percent increase in murder rates after executing a prisoner in 1979 for the first time after fifteen years (“White

The death penalty is one of the most controversed punishments in the United States. According to The Death Penalty Information Center, 88% of criminologist do not believe the death penalty is an effective deterrent. According to deterrence theory, criminals are no different from law abiding people. Individuals settle on their choices taking into account the net expenses and advantages of every option. There is a basis provided for analyzing how capital punishment should influence murder rates, according to the deterrence theory. Throughout the years, a few studies have shown a connection in the middle of executions and reductions in homicide rates.

If a serial killer is caught and has no chance of being free, it saves lives of the people who could have been caught in their path. The death penalty will take many killers off the streets. "In summary, the recent studies using panel data techniques have confirmed what we learned decades ago: Capital punishment does, in fact, save lives. Each additional execution appears to deter between three and 18 murders," claimed David B. Muhlhausen in his testimony. Even if capital punishment only deters three murders, that is three lives that have been saved. The panel data research proves that the death penalty is not a harsh punishment because it saves the innocent lives of many citizens. It is true that, not every state agrees with the death penalty. There are 18 states that have a ban against the death penalty (Procon.org). Nevertheless, the website also states, "Throughout the 1990s, our society increased the number of executions, and the number of murders plummeted. Since 2001, there has been a decline in executions and an increase in murders." When executions are used more often, the rate of murders goes down. This also proves that the states that have the death penalty are more safe than the states that have a ban against

4. Lack of Deterrence - The purpose of any punishment should be deterrence from repeating the same act. But, according to the statistics available, the death penalty has not been effective in controlling the homicide rate. The studies have revealed the shocking truth that executions actually increase the murder rate. That means the capital punishment does not deter violent crime. According to a New York Times study, the last 20 years witnessed 48% homicide rate in states with the implementation of capital punishment compared to 23% in the states without capital punishment.

Defenders of the death penalty often claim that the execution of criminals will teach others not to do bad, initially decreasing crime rates. This hasty form of generalization statistically proves to be wrong. “When it comes to criminals, Texas has the toughest punishments along with a strict court system. The state of Texas spent four hundred and seventy million dollars in 2001 just for punishing convicts. Despite all that money and stern punishment, the crime rate is still twenty four percent higher than the national average, according to 2003 data” (Gonzales). This supports the fact that tough punishment doesn’t necessarily help crime. Ironically, the harshest state in the U.S continues to house the maximum number of criminal acts. The death penalty, a harsh form of punishment, clearly doesn’t lower crime rate.

Capital crime is something that is meant for people that are found guilty of committing a serious crime, such as murder, rape, or theft. These are offences that should not be taken lightly but by killing the offender, the government is carrying about the action that they are trying to prevent. Also, the wrong person may be sentenced to death. After this person is executed, there is obviously nothing that can be done for the terrible mistake to be reversed. The death penalty should be abolished because it is more expensive than life imprisonment, numerous innocent people are condemned to death row, and it is cruel and inhumane.

In contrast, the question of deterrence can be answered objectively using common sense and statistics. By analyzing different arguments for and against the death penalty, such as the "fear of death" myth, the cost of the death penalty, and the racial and economic bias of the death penalty, it can be shown that the death penalty is not an effective deterrent of crime.

Unlike popular belief, the death penalty does not act as a deterrent to criminals. As stated by Alfred Blumstein, "Expert after expert and study after study has shown the lack of correlation between the treat of the death penalty and the occurrence of violent crimes." (Blumstein 68) Isaac Ehrlich's study on the limiting effects of capital punishment in America reveals this to the public. The study spans twenty-five years, from 1957 till 1982, and shows that in the first year the study was conducted, there were 8060 murders and 6 executions. However, in the last year of the study there were 22,520 murders committed and only 1 execution performed. (Blumstein 54) This clearly shows that