Capitol Punishment

Until the 1930’s, the death penalty was legal throughout the United States with little disapproval from the general public. However, as “Pro-Life” sentiments have developed and as people became more aware of the faulty nature of our legal system, the public distaste for capitol punishment has grown, making the death penalty a smoldering issue all over the nation. In the United States, the use of capital punishment continues to be a controversial issue.

Supporters of capital punishment have many arguments to defend their position. They contend that it deters future crime by assuming that criminals are afraid to die. They argue that it is less expensive to carry out capital punishment than it is to keep the criminal in jail for life. They believe the court system has given the criminal a fair trial with adequate representation. Further, they believe that capital punishment provides vengeance for victim’s families and retribution for a person’s crime. And ultimately they believe that it makes our communities safer.

Initially the arguments in favor of capital punishment seem justified; however the long-term effects on crime and society are problematic. Studies and statistics reveal that capital punishment is not a deterrent to crime and ultimately is a drain of tax payer money. Pursuit of vengeance and retribution has been proven to create an overall brutalization of society where human life becomes cheap. However, I believe that the ethical argument holds the strongest ground. My position is, simply stated, capital punishment is morally wrong.

A careful examination of the arguments in favor of capitol punishment reveals their invalidity. Many claim that the death penalty acts as a deterrent to capital crimes, however statistics say NO. As early as 1846, a study of murder rates after executions in Europe by Robert Rantour, Jr., found that murder rates went up rather than down after a public execution. In the

United States, the most influential study of this type was done by Robert Dann in 1935. He examined the murder rates in Philadelphia during the 60 days before and after well-publicized executions in 1927, 1929, 1930, 1931 and 1932. His conclusions were the same as those of Rantour in Europe. More importantly, Dann’s study stimulated other researchers to look at homicide rates in relation to public executions in the United States throughout the 20th century. Even with improvements in statistical analysis, the basic finding that capitol punishment is not a deterrent to capitol crime has held true.

All statistical studies aside, simple logic challenges the deterrent argument. Someone committing a premeditated crime does not expect to be caught. As a convicted murderer relates his article “A View from Death Row,” “There can be no deterrent value in a punishment that one does not ever expect to receive.” Equally, the emotionally driven murderer is unlikely to be deterred by the fear of the death penalty by the very nature of the crime. There is no thought of punishment when someone is spontaneously reacting to a situation.

Supporters of capital punishment claim that the cost incarceration for life is more expensive than an execution. However, again careful examination shows this to be untrue. Capital trails have procedural safeguards that are imposed by the U.S. Supreme Court, state courts and state statutes. These safeguards are meant to ensure that an innocent person is not put to death. The expense of the investigation, the trial, the sentencing, and the appeals process is usually born by the tax-paying public since the majority of defendants in murder trials are indigent and cannot pay for their own defense. There is conflicting information published regarding the expense of capital trials. Some sources say, “The high cost of capital punishment is created by the appeals process…The appeals process helps to make sure capital sentences are applied with some minimum level of competence across the country.” However, other sources cite more recent studies indicating that the bulk of expenses are incurred during the trial phase. Although supporters of capital punishment may argue when the cost is accrued and total dollar amounts spent, the fact remains: “Maintaining a system of capital punishment is far more expensive than sending murders to prison until they die of natural causes.” One example can be drawn from the strange case of Wilford Berry in Ohio who actually “volunteered” for execution. The State of Ohio spent at least $1.5 million to kill Wilford Berry because of required procedural expenses. This was almost 10% of the state’s annual budget for the capital crimes section for the 5 years it took to prosecute the case. The Columbus Dispatch determined that “Keeping Berry in prison for his entire life would have cost approximately half as much.”

The