Loza 1

Monica Loza
Mrs. Gardner
English 10 1
8 April 2014
The Death of Capital Punishment
Humans, by nature, strive to preserve life, not end it; its this sense of moral that makes
us human, and yet, some believe we have the right to take another humans life. Since childhood,
we have been taught the indisputable truth that murder is wrong so why is it okay If its done so
by our government. Capital Punishment, more commonly known as the death penalty is simply
an illusion of humane professional murder (Zivot). While capital punishment may or may not
deter the world of crime, one person at a time, it does so in a manner that not only abolishes a
life but also the humanity of those whose believe in it through its violations, financial costs, and
faults; therefore capital punishment should be put to death.
Supporters of this form of this sanction believe that capital punishment does more to
protect and benefit society than to harm it, in that it could provide closure to a community or
deter that community from future crimes (Kay). Some people would associate the death penalty
with the saying an eye for and eye in that it provides closure to the affected families (Dobbs).
Late Professor of Jurisprudence at Fordham University, Ernest Van Den Haag claims, Common
sense, lately bolstered by statistics, tells us that the death penalty will deter murder... People fear
nothing more than death. Therefore, nothing will deter a criminal more than the fear of death
(ProCon.org). Naturally, people fear death, therefore people use this logic to claim that the threat
of the death penalty daunts criminals who otherwise might not have been. To summarize,
Loza 2

supporters of the death penalty argue that the death of criminals does nothing but bring forth
beneficial attributes to society. This can be supported by statistics as far back as 1930 (see fig. 1)
but since then, new studies have shown that the murder rate in death penalty states are up to 46%
higher than those without. While some may believe that capital punishment may deter crime and
bring closure, that doesnt veto the substantial negative effects of the death penalty.
Admittedly, the death penalty may provide benefits to the families affected by a heinous
crime. Nevertheless, capital punishment violates our rights as members of the United States.
"Death is... an unusually severe punishment, unusual in its pain, in its finality, and in its
enormity... The fatal constitutional infirmity in the punishment of death is that it treats 'members
of the human race as nonhumans, as objects to be toyed with and discarded. says William J.
Brennan, Justice of the US Supreme Court (ProCon.org). The eighth amendment states that cruel
and unusual punishment shall never be inflicted. This is a phrase describing punishment which is
considered unacceptable due to the suffering, pain, or humiliation it inflicts on the person
Fig. 1. This graph by the Bureau of Criminal Justice suggests that as more
executions are performed, the few murders occur (Capital Punishment).
Loza 3

subjected to it. And yet, even with this information, only a few months ago in Ohio, Dennis
McGuire took 26 minutes to die by injection, gasping repeatedly. On Jan. 9 in Oklahoma,
Michael Lee Wilson's final words were, "I feel my whole body burning" (End Capital
Punishment). While a crime may be so heinous and malicious that death seems like a viable, who
are we do sentence someone to a death so painful?
Furthermore, research displays that life in prison is overwhelmingly more cost effective
than being sentenced to death by lethal injection. According to a study completed by David
Erikson and published on the deathpenalty.org, California has spent more than $4 billion on
capital punishment since it was reinstated in 1978 (about $308 million for each of the 13
executions carried out) resulting in taxpayers paying more than $250 million for each execution.
The cost of a system which imposes a maximum penalty of lifetime incarceration instead of the
death penalty would be $11.5 million per year, a difference of over $3.5 billion. Richard C.
Dieter, Executive Director of the Death Penalty Information Center further explains why and
how the death penalty devours societys money,
In the course of my work, I believe I have reviewed every state and federal study of the
costs of the death penalty in the past 25 yearsThey all concluded that the cost of the
death penalty amounts to a net expense to the state and the taxpayersEverything that is
needed for an ordinary trial is needed for a death penalty case, only more so: more pre-
trial time, more experts, twice as many attorneys, two trials instead of one, and then will
come a series of appeals during which the inmates are held in the high security of death
row follows. (ProCon.org)
Loza 4

Its clear that the costs of taking a humans life outweighs that of sentencing him to life without
parole. Capital punishment should be substituted for an alternative that consumes less money that
could be otherwise used to protect the public.
Ultimately, the death penalty should be abolished not solely for the fact that it violates
our rights, costs innocent taxpayers their hard-earned money, but also because it is a method that
can never be perfected. As humans, the system is bound to make mistakes. However, when a life
is at stake, error cannot be an option. Although some states are perusing to find more humane
alternatives to lethal injection, the current method, some of the 1200 people executed since 1976
have been proven to be innocent. A report in The New York Times stated, that simply within this
century, 343 people were wrongly convicted of offenses punishable by death and of those
innocent people, 25 were in fact executed. Humans are prone to make mistakes. While we may
not be able to change another humans actions, the abolishment of capital punishment is
something that can be used to ensure that our government doesnt make fatal ones
(Bloodsworth). There will never be a guarantee that irrevocable mistakes won't be made.
Therefore, because of this constant issue, the death penalty should never be a viable option for
punishment.
In conclusion, capital punishment violates our rights, costs more than is necessary, and
provokes irreversible mistakes and should thus be deemed illegal. This nation is not about
cutting off the legs of a thief or the hands of an abuser to prevent it from reoccurring; this is
considered barbaric. And yet, we continue to take lives as a means for protecting others. The
death penalty is one that suppresses natural and legal rights, evokes revenge, and ultimately
leaves the public with overall negative effects. It is something that cannot continue to be
tolerated by a nation that live by freedom and justice for all. Capital punishment should be
Loza 5

replaced with life imprisonment: a more effective, less expensive option for keeping society safe.
Objection to the death penalty is not a plea to save the guilty but a chance at keeping humanity
alive.




















Loza 6

Work Cited

Bloodsworth, Kirk. "My Case Shows the Need to Abolish the Death Penalty." McClatchy-
Tribune News Service. 05 Jul. 2013: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 17 Apr. 2014.
"Capital Punishment and Innocent Executions." Stuart Warren. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 May 2014.
"Death Penalty : The High Cost of the Death Penalty." deathpenalty.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 May
2014.
"Death Penalty." ProCon.org Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 May 2014.
Dobbs, Greg. "State Inmates Convicted of Murder Deserve Their Fates." Denver Post. 17 Mar.
2013: D.4. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 17 Apr. 2014.
"End Capital Punishment." Buffalo News. 01 Feb. 2014: A.6. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 1
Apr. 2014.
Margolick, David. "25 WRONGFULLY EXECUTED IN U.S." The New York Times. The New
York Times, n.d. Web. 11 May 2014.
Zivot, Joel. "Why I Want to Ban Lethal Injections." USA TODAY. 16 Dec. 2013: A.10. SIRS
Issues Researcher. Web. 12 May. 2014.