The Downfalls of Capital Punishment
Death....most of us fear it, and all of us will experience it. Many consider death to be the ultimate penalty. It has become more widely used n the judicial system, and more people have come to support it along with other forms of capital punishment. Unfortunately, they do this without thinking. I'm going to do some thinking for you and tell why capital punishment should not be used.
Capital punishment is neither practical nor lawful. Our constitution guarantees that criminals will not be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment, but capital punishment fits both of these categories. Authorizing, condoning, and engaging in acts of hurting, or even killing, people, is cruel. Capital punishment is unusual because out of all the industrialized western nations, the United States is the only one that uses this form of punishment. So, capital punishment goes against our constitution. It also denies due process of law. Death sentences are given arbitrarily. If there were two different people in two different areas who committed the exact same crime, one may get the death penalty and the other may not. Looking at the percentages of people who get the penalty, it is imposed disproportionately on different races and classes. In 1975, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty must be enforced fairly and with consistency or not at all. Since it is not being enforced consistently, it shouldn't be enforced. Furthermore, anyone who has the death penalty imposed on them will not be able to benefit from new evidence or laws that could overturn the sentence or even the verdict itself. One argument for capital punishment is that it will be a deterrent for violent crime. The police chiefs who enforce the law ranked capital punishment as the least effective way to reduce violent crime because it does not deter crime at all. There is no correspondence whatsoever between the number of executions and the crime rate. The death penalty serves no practical role in society.
It doesn't serve a philosophical role either. Janet Reno said, "...the only purpose for the death penalty...is vengeance--pure and simple vengeance. . . ." As the leader of the free world, we should be far above vengeance. As a society, we have decided that hurting people is wrong. What is the difference between a crazed murderer killing a person, and an executioner hurting someone? The only difference is that you call one murder, and the other justice. But the second isn't really justice. It's revenge. People do make compelling arguments that these horrible killers should be put to death and not allowed free reign in society. But to them I say that even though these murderers are horrible people, they are still human, and are ". . . endowed by their creator with certain inalienable human rights, among which is life. . ." Just because we don't kill these murderers doesn't mean that we let them go free. Policemen have agreed that stiffer sentences is the best way to curb crime. We can lock up the lawbreakers for life, that way we don't violate our own laws, and they will not be on the street committing more crimes either.
Capital punishment is something that we cannot condone. Using capital punishment will not solve any of our problems, so there is no practical reason to use it. We have to hold true to our ideals, that all people deserve the right to be treated under the laws, that even though murderers are terrible people, they are still people, and still deserving of those fundamental human rights which we cherish. We are far above revenge, and should not stoop down to the murderer's level. Do not be so quick to toss your values out the window; instead, hold true to your ideals and do not allow capital punishment, a grave injustice, to continue.