Merrill 1 Katie Merrill Ms.

Patroni English 111 14 November 2013 Legalization of the Death Penalty The death penalty is the execution of a convicted criminal by government authority. It is a form of capital punishment that has been practiced since ancient times. It is generally enforced only when punishing a criminal who has committed a heinous crime such as murder, espionage, or treason (Issitt). The United States is one of the countries still remaining that implements the death penalty. However, not all states in the U.S. implement it, and have made it illegal to do so. Thirty-two states in the U.S. use the death penalty, and the other eighteen have abolished it (States With and Without the Death Penalty"). It is a hotly debated issue in the U.S. today, and the arguments revolve around the legal, moral, and economic aspects of its use. (Issitt). Although it is debated, the death penalty has proven to be an efficient form of punishment for heinous crimes committed throughout time. The death penalty should be legalized in all states because it serves justice, is cost-efficient, and is an effective crime deterrent. For justice to properly be served, the punishment must fit the crime. Obviously, with lesser offenses such as stealing, or possession of drugs, time in prison would serve as a sufficient punishment. However, for serious crimes such as murder or treason, the only form of justice is the death penalty (Pearce). The death penalty restores order with the use of authority and it adequately punishes the criminal. Those willing to take the life of an innocent victim should be punished in turn by their life being taken away. The retribution for a heinous crime committed isnt necessarily rooted in revenge, but rather motivated by the need to serve justice. As best

Merrill 2 stated by Louis Pojman, PhD, a Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at West Point Military Academy, Retributivism is not based on hatred for the criminal. Retributivism is the theory that the criminal deserves to be punished in proportion to the gravity of his or her crime, whether or not the victim or anyone else desires it. We may all deeply regret having to carry out the punishment, but consider it warranted (Top 10 Pros and Cons - Death Penalty). When applying this theory in the case of a murder, the murderers punishment should be equal to the gravity of the crime. The death penalty must be enforced to properly serve justice, as it was warranted. How would you feel if one of your family members was murdered and the murderer was let off the hook with an early release from a life sentence in prison? Would you feel like justice has been served? You would probably feel betrayed in some way. Many murderers who have been sentenced to life imprisonment are released fifteen or twenty years later, only to kill again (Robinson). If the death penalty had been implemented, this would not have occurred. The death penalty is an assurance that those who commit the atrocious crime of murder will never have the opportunity to commit the same crime again. This is something that life imprisonment cannot guarantee for one-hundred percent certainty. The death penalty also serves as a solution to the overcrowding in many U.S. prisons today. There are 13.5 million people in the U.S. that serve time in prison every year. Nineteen of the nations fifty top prisons are overcrowded. Hundreds being housed in those prisons are murderers ("States With and Without the Death Penalty). The death penalty would solve this problem, as the necessary justice would be served. No longer would tax money have to be drained from citizens to house murderers, so they can have three warm meals a day and a free place to stay. If justice was served up front through the death penalty, the amount of time these

Merrill 3 murderers would stay in prison would greatly decrease, depending on the line for death row. This would in turn decrease the amount that citizens pay to house criminals who commit heinous crimes. The death penalty serves as a crime deterrent to violent crimes. Statistical evidence supports this fact. From 1966-1980, when only six executions took place, the murder rate in the United States nearly doubled, from 5.6 per 100,000 people to 10.2. That rate fell to 5.7 in 1999, when executions reached a 45-year high of 98 (Pearce). When murderers act on their impulses to kill, they may think twice before carrying out their plan. John McAdams, a political science professor at Marquette University, proves this point when he states, Capital punishment is a certain deterrent for those who need to be deterred the most: the murderers themselves (Pearce). Statistical evidence overwhelmingly proves that there is a direct correlation between the number of murders and executions taken out each year. Michael Summers, PhD, Professor of management science at Pepperdine University, describes this through a study conducted examining the correlation of the number of murders and executions in the U.S. from 1979 to 2004. Research shows that each execution carried out is correlated with about 74 fewer murders the following year... There seems to be an obvious negative correlation in that when executions increase, murders decrease, and when executions decrease, murders increase (Top 10 Pros and Cons - Death Penalty). Some people may argue that with the implementation of the death penalty comes the risk of killing innocent people. This is a valid concern. However, Less than 0.5% of death penalty cases risk any serious danger of claiming innocent victims (Pearce). Therefore, those who are against the death penalty can rest assured in the fact that the chance of an innocent person being executed is next to nothing. Many also argue that the death penalty is unconstitutional as it is

Merrill 4 cruel and unusual punishment. This however is untrue, as the way executions are taken out is very humane. There is no pain purposely inflicted on the criminals. The only pain they may experience is the insertion of the IV (Top 10 Pros and Cons- The Death Penalty). Therefore this argument is invalid. Some people say that the death penalty is immoral because governments shouldnt have the right to take away the life of a human. However, it is immoral for a society not to demand the life of one who has taken the life of another, as it would give the idea that murder, an immoral act, was okay to commit. When the court system works and the one who commits a heinous crime is identified, society should enforce the right to take the criminals life. Many may also argue that a life sentence could serve as a substitute for execution, because it guarantees the prisoner will not have the ability to harm the public, and serves as punishment since the prisoner knows hell never be free. With this penalty always comes the possibility of escape, or the possibility of a prisoner killing a fellow prisoner or guard. Over the years the sentence for the prisoner could be changed by a soft-hearted judge. In this way, a life sentence does not guarantee that proper justice is served. The death penalty always ensures that justice is served in certainty (Top 10 Pros and Cons- The Death Penalty). The death penalty is very effective in punishing the most heinous crimes, and it is efficient in many different ways. It serves the proper justice, where the punishment fits the crime and ensures the criminal will never have the opportunity to commit the crime again. The death penalty is a cost efficient solution to the overcrowding in prisons, because it will reduce tax dollars spent on housing criminals in prison who commit atrocious crimes. Lastly, it serves as a crime deterrent for potential criminals. The arguments against the death penalty dont hold up sufficiently when closely examined. The death penalty option should be legalized for implementation in all states, and legislation to achieve this should begin in the near future.

Merrill 5 Works Cited Bowman, Jeffrey and Dilascio, Tracy M. The Death Penalty is Necessary. EBSCO Publishing, n.d. Web. 28 Oct. 2013. Issitt, Micha L., Newton, Heather. Death Penalty- and Overview. EBSCO Publishing. 2013. Web. 28 Oct. 2013. Pearce, Matt. Defending the Death Penalty. EBSCO Publishing. n.d. Web. 29 Oct. 2013. Robinson, Martin. "Revealed: The Five Murderers Freed from Life Sentences to Kill AGAIN." Mail Online. N.p., 16 Oct. 2013. Web. 28 Oct. 2013. "States With and Without the Death Penalty." Death Penalty Information Center. DPIC, n.d. Web. 28 Oct. 2013. Top 10 Pros and Cons - Death Penalty ProConorg Headlines. ProCon.org, n.d. Web. 28 Oct. 2013.