Death penalty debate
I can see both sides of the coin when it comes to the debate on the death penalty. This is because both sides have solid research and evidence to support there stances. What is Justice is the first question we need to ask. Justice for crimes committed can only be achieved when crime is punished, and it's not considered cruel or unusual. The issue seems to be does Capital Punishment violate the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and is Capital punishment considered being cruel and unusual punishment?
There seems to be at least three different stances on the subject. The first stance is the death penalty is the only fair punishment for murder. The second argument is we should abolish the death penalty because it's immoral, and is cruel and unusual. The last stance is the: middle of the road that the death penalty is not necessarily cruel and unusual punishment as long as it's applied in a humane way.
In the early 1960's the N.A.A.C.P legal defense fund was able to argue before the Supreme Court, that the death penalty was "cruel and unusual" punishment. The result was a stay put on executions in United States."In 1972, the U.S. Supreme court declared the death penalty was cruel and unusual" (Counterpoint 1). The Supreme Court four years later decided to allow capital punishment to resume; it took measures to make sure it wasn't implemented. The Supreme Court seemed to have washed their hands of issue, and had decided to leave it up to individual states. Justice William Rehnquist argued the Supreme Court didn't have the right to ban the Death penalty in states where people wanted it. He also believed the court was over stepping it's authority by banning the death penalty. This was due to case of Furman vs Georgia. Georgia used a loophole in its state statute, giving complete discretion's to judge and jury for the sentence of a convicted person. The U.S. Supreme court on September 2, 2003 ruled that juries not Judges must decide between the death penalty and life in prison, this ruling also invalidated 100 death sentences in three states.
The result of Georgia's actions was the rebirth of capital punishment. Today there are currently 38 states that have and use the death penalty. They claim to only use it for the most heinous crimes. There policies are required to have ridged requirements in place. When these policies and procedures are followed, these 38 states believe capital punishment is not considered to be "cruel or unusual punishment."These states have reported that convicts who have received the death penalty have been convicted murders, whom have additional violent felonies on there record.
"Most states use lethal injection as the method of execution"(Friedman 15) this is claimed to be the most humane way to executed a convict.When it comes to executing the sentence of death most states use lethal injection, however may states have at least one other form of execution available to them. In Idaho and Oklahoma they have the firing squad. New Hampshire, Washington, and Delaware can put someone to death by hanging. Then we still have five states that uses lethal gases; Arizona, California, Maryland, Missouri, and Wyoming. Electrocution is also currently practiced in the following states: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, Nebraska, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. These alternative methods of execution are bases for some states and individual, those have determined the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment. This is because with these alternative methods we have had cases of executions gone wrong.
The U.S. Supreme Court has since put limits on states as to what crimes can be punished by death, and did determine it was cruel to execute certain types of people. The crimes a person can be put to death are murder, with prior violent felony convictions. They also determined it's cruel to execute juveniles, and the mental retarded. The interpretation of however is determined by the individual states. States have the right to try juveniles as adults, and sentence them as adults is a area of concern, because it opens the question of is it cruel to try them as adults. There have been 22 case were juveniles committed murder, and then were executed as adults. The other problem we have is determining who is mentally retarded, because the Supreme Court didn't but an IQ number requirement in the statute. The Supreme Court again left this discussion up to the individual states. The acceptable range for states is between 65-75. When we look at functioning ability of individual in this range, just doesn't seem acceptable.
In conclusion the death penalty debate has some serious issues that need be dealt with before a person is able to take a stance on the debate. The U.S. Supreme Court need to action and to insure the death penalty is not cruel or unusual punishment. It seems the states have to much control on who lives or dies. These concerns have left me in the middle of road of the debate. Maybe with some consistence across the country, I would be willing except that the death penalty as justice for crimes against humanity.
Counterpoint:" Defending the Death Penalty" (Feb 2007)
http://search.ebscohost.com.aspx.com/ Web
Friedman, Lauri. The Death Penalty. California: San Diego, 2007. Print
Joan,
ReplyDeleteNice post. I have to say I agree and disagree with you, especially when it comes to the forms of the death penalty. Who is to say what is cruel and unusual? For instance, what if I am afraid of needles and would prefer to just inhale some gas, wouldn't you say that the injection would be the cruel one for me? Also I might be afraid that I might not die from the injection or gas and might want to be shot, who is to say that it is more inhumane? So really the idea would be to define cruel and unusual. I don't know if this is a good way to decide if you agree with the death penalty or not either. I think that the punishment should be fitting for a crime. Picture this...your child is taken out, raped, beaten, and violently murdered. What would you want for the perpetrator to have to do to pay for it? Could you find yourself forgiving or would you feel that they need to be punished harshly, the punishment to fit the crime?
I personally would not be able to deal with it. I think over time I might be able to forgive but I am not sure.
Then there is always does using the death penalty promote more violence? Some people say that the reason we have done away with an eye for an eye is that it is "cruel and unusual", but the real question is does that mean that the death penalty is cruel and unusual then? If a person steals do we still cut off their hand, maybe in some countries...so does this promote more violence? If someone loses their hand are they likely to try and steal again? I don't think that they will. Now look at someone who has assulted a child and were castrated, would that make them not do it again, in this situation probably not. I can see them doing it again because they will get the gratification from the control...if they are dead they wont though. I personally feel that capital punishment should be applied to any person who has committed a crime against a child as well as those who have murdered. In this case it is not cruel and unusual because the states are using a humane way of executing and I believe that you are able to choose what way you wish to die. Now being executed, I feel that is a way to end the violence. I don't think that others will be violent again because they see punishment carried out and are curious if it would happen to them. If you are Christian you may look at it as, the Bible has an eye for an eye in it but then who are we to play God with these people's lives because he will exact his vengence when they die. Well, yes we could look at it that way but we all have free will and who are they to play God and take someone's life?
As far as people who are executed for crimes they commit as children, I think it needs to be applied on a case by case basis. Can a child truly plan and carry out a murder...I say YES! Some are intelligent enough to actually plan and carry out murder. Should they be allowed to get away with it because they are a child? I say NO! However, if a child has committed a crime and there is a parent involved in them committing it the parent should be punished as well.
I have agreed with you that there are different issues with the death penalty and there are passionate people who are either for or against it. Although I concede that over the time, the death penalty has come through many changes, I still insist that there are many things that people need to do in order to bring the death penalty to be a good punishment and racial bias is one in those issues. For example, a report sponsored by the American Bar Association in 2007 concluded that one-third of African-American death row inmates in Philadelphia would have received sentences of life imprisonment if they had not been African-American (“Death Penalty and Race.”)
ReplyDeleteAlthough, in your post, you have resourceful examples and statistics, I wish that you have included those sources at the end of the article.
Work Cited:
“Death Penalty and Race.” www.amnestyusa.org. *Amnesty International USA*. Web. 13 Sep. 2009.