Putting to Death the Death Penalty

The Supreme Court will be considering whether execution by lethal injection violates the Eighth amendment prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment.  Whether lethal injection is unconstitutional or not, this issue ignites another debate: whether or not the death penalty should still be permitted in the United States.  Right now advocates and opponents of capital punishment are clashing on Capitol Hill to present their sides of this ongoing debate.

Advocates argue that the death penalty is a final solution for a problematic individual and guarantees they will no longer cause issues for society.  It is believed that the death penalty also serves as a warning to potential criminals of what will occur if they do decide to commit a serious crime.  This warning serves as a preventative measure against potential crime before it ever occurs.

This belief has undergone several studies that support the argument.  For example, during the U.S. moratorium of capital punishment, murder rates dramatically increased.  Furthermore, a large percentage of countries that have abolished the death penalty have shown significantly increased crime rates from that point forward.  As for the death penalty being a final solution, this is inarguable.  There is no way to reverse this punishment.

Opponents of the death penalty have their own share of points for their position.  It is argued that the death penalty is a cruel and aged method of dealing with criminals.  The death penalty is seen as costly and expensive to the American taxpayer as well as local governments.  The definite irreversible nature of capital punishment is also argued to cause unjust deaths that are simply legitimized murders.

Again, studies have been conducted to support these claims.  Capital punishment has been sentenced in over 20 cases where the defendant was wrongly charged guilty, supporting the legitimized murder claim.  Capital punishment is also definitively an aged method of dealing with criminals.  The majority of first world nations have banned this form of punishment.  The U.S., Japan, and India are essentially the only developed countries that allow capital punishment today. 

Another proven fact used in arguments by opposition groups is that the death penalty is far more expensive to both the American taxpayer and local and federal governments than imprisonment.  The national average cost of execution is above $2 million per case.  In Texas, one of the states that most commonly implements capital punishment, costs amount to approximately $2.3 million per execution, ranging from 150 percent to 300 percent more than the cost of lifetime imprisonment.

This cost comes largely from the price of the extensive trial required prior to an execution.  Expert witnesses must be called upon by the court, scientific advisors must be hired, an in-depth investigation must occur with costly law-enforcement units, and the progressively expensive trial must be dragged on for long periods of time in an attempt to ensure the sentence is correct.  This large cost is also derived from the costly equipment and worker salaries required to carry out an arguably humane execution.

The arguments on both side of this case have solid ground.  However, when the issue is regarded from a purely objective, legal standpoint, the cost, cruelty, and effect on crime rates have no significance.  Ultimately, what matters is that the justice system is in place to provide justice to both the criminal and the victims of the crime.  The death penalty does not provide this justice.
Simply killing a criminal does not right the situation.  It does not provide him or her with the potential of redemption or rehabilitation.  It does not provide the victim with reparations or a correction to the problems caused by the crime.  The death penalty simply provides an ambiguous and indeterminate punishment.

Capital punishment does not provide justice. However, it does raise difficult issues including high cost, the potential for false executions, and an arguably inhumane act being committed against a fellow human being. 

These potential negative side effects coupled with the fact that the death penalty does not provide justice, make it an entirely unwarranted action.  As the Supreme Court prepares to make its decision on lethal injection, perhaps it should instead consider the legitimacy of capital punishment itself.