Death Penalty Position Paper

Death Penalty Position Paper

Introduction:

The death penalty has been a controversial and very debatable issue for centuries. People have
been sentenced to capital punishment since the beginning of civilization it has been accepted as fair
punishment by governmental bodies of any period in time. Over time capital punishment has become
more human going from beheadings, to electric chairs, to now a lethal injection, however the execution
may be processed the point is that they still take place in civilization today. The issue with the death
penalty is that some people think it is inhumane or immoral, even unconstitutional, while others think
the exact opposite and believe that it is necessary for a well established governmental system.

The death penalty is supported by all members of the Supreme Court (abcnews2012) meaning
that in fact it is constitutional, if it is legal and takes place in the United States today it is because it is in
fact following all guidelines within the constitution such as the 8th and 14th amendments. The issue
then becomes about how capital punishment has lead to executions of innocent people living many
people arguing how it is an abomination to have such punishments specially when innocent people go
through flawed trials and are executed or in other words murdered in vain. Those are the main issues
with the death penalty today.

Discussion:

As I supporter of the death penalty, it is clear that this form of capital punishment is not only
proper for severe cases when criminals have committed unthinkable crimes, it is necessary. Certain
people such as Jeffry Dahmer who murdered 17 men and children, and who not only dismembered his
victims’ bodies, he also ate some of his victims (biography2012); or John Wane Gacy who murdered 33
men and children while dressed as a clown and before murdering them raping the victims, this man’s
last word were “kiss my ass” (biography2012). These two particular example are extreme cases were
serial killers obviously got pleasure from murdering their victims and felt no regrets of the crimes they
committed, there for the death penalty was a correct punishment for these people. After all the pain
they had brought to the victims’ families and the violations of the law in such extreme manner the only
reasonable and well earned capital punishment was death.

The point is not to give the death penalty so freely to every criminal who murders a person, but
only those very extreme and severe cases where the person committed the crime was a serial killer or
someone who got pleasure form murdering the victims. The death penalty should only be given after
much investigation and a certainty of who the criminal is in order to prevent executions of innocent
people. However, it is certain that this punishment is necessary for several reasons. For starts one of the
biggest upsides of the death penalty is that once the criminal is executed the families of the victim gets
closure and feel safer that person is no longer a threat to them. Also this is a way of the legal system to
show potential criminals that capital punishment will be issued and perhaps stopping people from
committing certain crimes out of fear of being prosecuted to the point their life will be taken away. In
only special cases then, the death penalty is not only a reasonable punishment it is necessary.

Conclusion:

Being a conservative Texan and having old conservative morals I agree with this particular quote
form student daily “To a conservative Texan politician the death penalty it is neither ‘cruel’ or ‘unusual’
executing a murderer is the appropriate punishment for taking an innocent life” (studentsnewdaily
2010) The death penalty does not seem cruel or unusual in any way. Certain people just deserve to be
punished in such harsh manner due to the crimes they committed. The death penalty follows the
constitution and does not break any amendment, it might seem immoral to some people or even
inhumane but that is not the point, the point with this form of capital punishment is to serve justice and
bring comfort to those affected by these criminals, the point is to have a strong sense of justice in the
country to stop men and women from becoming serial killers and struck fear to those who feel pleasure
when killing innocent people. There for I know that if a family member of mine was a victim of a serial
killers killing spree I would want that person to be prosecuted and get the death penalty, some people
just simply deserve it.

Abstract:

The death penalty is indeed controversial and has many issues with it but one thing is very clear,
it is constitutional and major body figures such as Rick Perry the Governor of Texas and the Supreme
Court members are strong supporters of it (Alarcon 2012) (prisonpolicy.org.). These people support it for
a good simple reason, it works. If the system was flawed or simply cruel or unusual the punishment
wouldn’t even be an option. Criminals convicted to death row are extreme cases where the right and
constitutional thing to do is convict them to the death penalty. To have justice and a strong control on
crime capital punishment is needed as an example to show that murder and rape will not be tolerated
here, giving civilians a sense of security and comfort that they are well protected against these
psychopaths, and giving myself a sense of security.

References:

http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/

http://www.biography.com/people/john-wayne-gacy-10367544

www.Abcnews.go.com

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/

http://www.thisnation.com/question/018.html

http://www.deathpenalty.org/
FOR THE DEATH PENALTY (PROS)

Threat of Death Penalty Rate of Homicide Decreases

Frank Carrington (1978) states- is there any way one can tell whether the death

penalty deters murders from killing? There is no way one can tell whether the

death penalty deters murderers from killing. The argument goes on that proponents

of capital punishments should not have to bear the burden of proving deterrence by

a reasonable doubt. Nor should the abolitionist have to prove deterrence by a

reasonable doubt -neither side would be able to anyway.

Frank Carrington (1978) claims common sense supports the inference that if,

the threat of the death penalty decreases, the rate of murders increases than it may

be true. But if the threat had increased, the homicide rate may decrease.

Justice Stewart held in the Supreme Court in Gregg v. Georgia:

Although some of the studies suggest that the death

penalty may not function as a significantly greater

deterrent than lesser penalties, there is no convincing

empirical evidence supporting or refuting this view.

We may nevertheless assume safely there are murders,

such as those who act in passion, for whom the threat of

death has little or no deterrent effect. But for many others,

the death penalty undoubtedly, is a significant deterrent.

 There are carefully contemplated murders, such as murder

for hire, where the possible penalty of death may well enter

the cold calculus that precedes the decision to act

( as cited in Carrington, 1978. p. 87).

J. Edgar Hoover, late director of Federal Bureau of Investigations, asks the

following questions: “Have you ever thought about how many criminals escape

punishment, and yet, the victims never have a chance to do that? Are crime victims

in the United States today the forgotten people of our time? Do they receive full

measure of justice (as cited in Isenberg, 1977, p. 129)?

A criminal on death row has a chance to prepare his death, make a will, and

make his last statements, etc. while some victims can never do it. There are many

other crimes where people are injured by stabbing, rape, theft, etc. To some

degree at least, the victims right to freedom and pursuit of happiness is violated.

When the assailant is apprehended and charged, he has the power of the

judicial process who protects his constitutional rights. What about the victim? The

assailant may have compassion from investigating officers, families and

friends. Furthermore, the criminal may have organized campaigns of propaganda to

build sympathy for him as if he is the one who has been sinned against. These false

claims are publicized, for no reason, hence, protecting the criminal (Isenberg, I.,

1977).

The former Theodore L. Sendak, Attorney General of Indiana delivered a

speech to Law enforcement officials in Northern Indiana on May 12, 1971 (as cited in
Isenberg, 1977):
 “Our system of criminal law is to minimize human

suffering by works or order primarily to forestall

violence or aggression. In the question of the death

penalty, we must ask ourselves which action will

serve the true humanitarian purpose of criminal law.

We should weigh the death of the convicted murders

against the loss of life of his victims and the possibility

of potential victims to murder (p. 129)

In arguments of the death penalty, there are two lives to think about. Too

much emphasis is placed on the convicted murderer, the one being executed, and the

victim is all forgotten.

Crime Rate Increases

Millions are being killed and will be killed because our justice system is not

working. Millions have already been killed and will be killed every year. According

to Time Magazine, there are 2,000,000 people beaten in the United States. Some are

knifed, shot, or assaulted (Internet).

Crime growth has been going up in the past because of too much leniency

going hand in hand with the increased rate of people being victimized. There are

many loop holes devised for offenders, and because of that crime rate has increased

drastically. Between l960 to 1968 crime rate increased 11 times. More and more

people are being murdered, raped, assaulted, kidnapped, and robbed, etc. (Isenberg,

I., 1997).

Free Will
 When you commit a felony, it is a matter of free will. No one is compelled to

commit armed robbery, murder, or rape. The average citizen does not have a mind

or intentions to become a killer or being falsely accused of murder. What he is

worried about is being a victim.

Deterrent in 27 States

Opponents argue that there is no deterrent effect by using the death

penalty. According to Baily, who did a study from l967 to l968, the death penalty was

a deterrent

in 27 states. When there was a moratorium on Capital Punishment in the United

States, the study showed murder rates increased by 100%. The study also reviewed 14

nations who abolished the death penalty. It (the study) claimed murder increased by

7% from five years before the abolition period to the five years after the abolition

(Internet).

Studies were made by Professor Isaac Erlich between the period of 1933 and

1969. He concluded “An additional execution per year may have resulted in fewer

murders (Bedau, 1982, p. 323)”.

The number of years on the average spent in death row is 10 years. It is

known, with all the appeals, the death penalty is not swift! In fact, most murderers

feel they most likely will never be put to death. If the death penalty was swift and

inevitable, there certainly would be a decrease in homicide rates. (Internet).

Death Feared
 Most people have a natural fear of death- its a trait man have to think about

what will happen before we act. If we don’t think about it consciously, we will think

about it unconsciously. Think- if every murderer who killed someone died instantly,

the homicide rate would be very low because no one likes to die. We cannot do this,

but if the Justice system can make it more swift and severe, we could change the

laws to make capital punishment faster and make appeals a shorter process. The

death penalty is important because it could save the lives of thousands of potential

victims who are at stake (Bedau, H., 1982).

In a foot note Bedau (1982) cites, “Actually being dead is no different from not

being born, a (non) experience we all had before being born. But death is not

realized. The process of dying which is a different matter is usually confused with

it. In turn, dying is feared because death is expected, even though death is feared

because it is confused with dying (p. 338)”.

Death is an experience that cannot be experienced and ends all

experience. Because it is unknown as it is certain, death is universally feared. “The

life of a man should be sacred to each other (Bedau, H., 1982, p. 330)”.

Innocent Executed - no Proof

Opponents claim lots of innocent man are wrongly executed. There has never

been any proof of an innocent man being executed!! A study by Bedau-Radlet

claimed there were 22 cases where the defendant have been wrongly

executed. However, this study is very controversial. Studies like Markman and

Cassell find that the methodology was flawed in l2 cases. There was no substantial

evidence of guilt, and no evidence of innocence. Moreover, our judicial system takes
extra precautions to be sure the innocent and their rights are protected. Most likely

an innocent person would not be executed (Internet).

Death Penalty Saves Lives

The question is whether or not execution of an innocent person is strong

enough to abolish the death penalty. Remember, the death penalty saves

lives. Repeat murders are eliminated and foreseeable murders are deterred. You

must consider the victim as well as the defendant.

Hugo Bedau (1982) claims:

The execution of the innocent believed guilty is a

miscarriage of justice that must be opposed whenever

detected. But such miscarriage of justice do not

warrant abolition at the death penalty. Unless the

moral drawbacks of an activity practice, which include

the possible death of innocent lives that might be saved

by it, the activity is warranted. Most human activities like

medicine, manufacturing, automobile, and air traffic, sports,

not to mention wars and revolutions, cause death of

innocent bystanders. Nevertheless, advantages outweigh

the disadvantages, human activities including the penal

system with all its punishments are morally justified ( p. 323).

 Wesley Lowe states, “As for the penal system, accidentally executing an

innocent person, I must point out that in this imperfect world, citizens are required to

take certain risks in exchange for safety.” He says we risk dying in an accident when

we drive a car, and it is acceptable. Therefore, risking that someone might be

wrongfully executed is worth saving thousand’s of innocent people who may be the

next victim of murder (Internet).

Death Penalty - Right to Live

Opponents say the State is like a murder himself. The argument here is, if

execution is murder, than killing someone in war is murder. Our country should stop

fighting wars. On the contrary, is it necessary to protect the rights of a group of

people. Hence, the death penalty is vital to protect a person’s right to live! Is

arresting someone same as kidnapping someone? In the same, executing someone is

not murder, it is punishment by society for a deserving criminal.

Bible Quotes

Huggo A. Bedau (1982) states one popular objection to Capital punishment is

that it gratifies the desire for revenge regarding as unworthy. The bible quotes the

Lord declaring “Vengeance is mine” (Romans 12:19). He thus legitimized vengeance

and reserved it to Himself. However, the Bible also enjoins, “The murderer shall

surely be put

to death” (Numbers 35:16-18), recognizing that the death penalty can be warranted

whatever the motive. Religious tradition certainly suggest no less (p. 330).
 All religions believe having life is sacred. If we deprive someone else life, he

only suffers minor inconvenience; hence, we cheapen human life—this is where we

are at today.

Death Penalty Deterrent Effect

If we do not know whether the death penalty will deter others, we will be

confronted with two uncertainties . If we have the death penalty and achieve no

deterrent effect, than, the life of convicted murderers has been expended in vain

(from a deterrent point of view)—here is a net loss. If we have the death sentence,

and deter future murderers, we spared the lives of future victims-(the prospective

murderers gain, too; they are spared punishment because they were deterred). In

this case, the death penalty is a gain, unless the convicted murderer is valued more

highly than that of the unknown victim, or victims (Carrington, F., l978).

Capital Punishment is not excessive, unnecessary punishment, for those who

knowingly and intentionally commits murder in premeditation, to take lives of

others. Even though capital punishment is not used so often, it still is a threat to

the criminal.

Justice

Justice requires punishing the guilty even if only some can be punished and

sparing the innocent, even if all are not spared. Morally, justice must always be

preferred to equality. Justice cannot ever permit sparing some guilty person, or

punishing some innocent ones, for the sake of equality—because others have been

spared or punished. In practice, penalties could never be applied if we insisted that

they can be inflicted on only a guilty person unless we are able to make sure that
they are equally applied to all other guilty persons. Anyone familiar with the law

enforcement knows that punishments can be inflicted only on an unavoidable

“shudder” selection of the guilty (Bedau, H., 1977).

Irwin Isenberg (1977) said, when you kill a man with premeditation, you do

something different than stealing from him. “I favor the death penalty as a matter

of justice and human dignity even apart from deterrence. The penalty must be

appropriate to the seriousness of the crime (p. 135).

Life is Sacred

In an interview with Professor van den Haag, a psychoanalyst and adjunct

professor at New York University, was questioned, “Why do you favor the death

penalty?” His answer was that the Federal prison had a man sentenced to Life who,

since he has been in prison committed three more murders on three separate

occasions .They were prison guards and inmates. There’s no more punishment he can

receive, therefore, in many cases, the death penalty is the only penalty that can

deter. He went on saying “I hold life sacred, and because I hold it sacred, I feel that

anyone who takes some one’s life should know that thereby he forsakes his own and

does not just suffer an inconvenience about being put into prison for sometime (as

cited in Isenberg, 1977, p. 135)

An Eye for an Eye

Some people argue that the capital punishment tends to brutalize and

disregards society. Do you agree? Some people say the that penalty is legalized

murder because it is like “an eye for an eye”. The difference between punishment

and the crime is that one is legalized and the other is not! People are more
brutalized by what they see on T.V. daily. People are not brutalized by

punishments they are brutalized by our failure to serious punish, the brutal acts.

Could the same effect be achieved by putting the criminal in prison for

life? “Life in prison” means in six months the parole board can release the man to 12

years in some states. “But even if it were real life imprisonment, it’s deterrent

effect will never be as great as that of the death penalty. The death penalty is the

only actually irrevocable penalty. Because of that, it is the one that people fear the

most (Isenberg, I., 1977).

The framers of the constitution clearly believed that Capital punishment was

an acceptable mess of protecting society form “wicked dissolute men” Thomas

Jefferson liked to talk about it (Carrington, F., 1978).

CONCLUSION

My research on issues on the death penalty is one of the most debatable in

the criminal justice system. Today, there are many pros and cons to this death

penalty issues. However, if people weigh the arguments properly, and have empathy

for the victims, they will be more inclined to favor capital punishment. As a matter

of fact, most people in the U.S. today are in favor of it. But we need more states to

enforce the death penalty.

As you may have read in the arguments, the death penalty help to curtail

future murderers, thus, we can save more lives. The chances of murdering an

innocent man is very minute.

My Opinion
 In my opinion, I am in favor of the death penalty, because we can save

innocent lives. Life to me is scared as Professor Haag stated. My innocent nephew,

Sean Burgado, who was brutally murdered by a shot gun to the chest, did not have a

choice to make a last statement or make a will before he died. The people on

death row can watch T.V. and enjoy their lives for another 20 years before they are

executed. They can prepare their death by making a will and a last

statement. Sean’s murder is still unsolved, and the killer is enjoying his life

somewhere. The murderer(s) will probably murder another person some day.

I heard on the news last month, February 2000, where a 62 year-old

grandmother, Betty Beets, was pleading for her life because she was on death row

and was going to be executed. At first, I felt very sorry for her, but after doing

research on her, I learned she had five husbands. She had already killed the fourth

one, and served a prison sentence for murder, and she got out of prison early. She

murdered the fifth husband-she shot him, and buried him in her back yard. Betty

Beets was imprisoned a second time, and now was pleading for her life? It has been

proven these killers do it again and again. The rate of recidivism is high for people

who commit murder and crimes. I feel murderers should be executed the first

time because chances are they will come out of prison and kill another innocent

person again. We need stricter laws and swift death penalty.

I belong to a group called Parents of Murdered Children (POMC). One of the

woman came forward and told me how her husband shot and killed her five year-old

daughter which she witnessed on her birthday. He attempted to kill the two-year old

son, too, but fortunately, the gun he was using didn’t go off a second time, because it

was too old and the son’s life was sparred. Her husband’s intention was to kill the
two children, and himself on her (the wife’s) birthday. He said, if I can’t have my

children you won’t either. Everything to her is still a nightmare.

He (the husband) was sentenced to death, but committed suicide in

prison. She recently learned that prior to the killing he had contracted someone

$5,000 to burn their house while she and the kids were inside.

She said she would have gone to see her husband being executed if he lived

because she didn’t want him out again. She said, “To me, I think for the most part, I

didn’t care what happened to him. I just didn’t want him to be out again after what

he did. I told the District Attorney that I was afraid that he would get out and try to

finish what he started” (Email, personal communication- March 31, 2000).

There are too many stories like these where people deserve the death penalty

for killing other people. If they are released from prison, they will kill other

innocent lives again.

I believe life is sacred, therefore, one who takes a life should have his own

life taken away, too. The Lord said in Exodus “Thou shalt not kill!”. It is one of the

Ten Commandments.

The laws today are too lenient. If there is no death penalty in your state, and

a criminal kills someone, it is because he felt he could get out in 10 years or less

from prison. There is no fear of death for him. They see other murderers in the state

get away with murder, so they, too, can get away with it. They don’t have to fear

the death penalty. In fact, I read where a husband intentionally moved to a non

death penalty state, so he could murder his wife and get away with it. Many murders

are premeditated. People in the “heat of passion” should make it a point to evade
the argument or the environment. Remember it could be one of your loved

ones. Can you imagine what it would be like to have your loved one murdered? There

are no words that can explain the loss of your loved one to murder. Call your state

legislature representatives today to enforce the death penalty in your state!

Lori Ornellas

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to look at both sides of the arguments of the

death penalty-the pros and cons, and how our criminal justice system makes

legislatures, courts, and the U.S. Supreme Court chose to resolve issues. Interesting

issues are brought up like the fear of the death penalty, bible quotes, how life is

sacred, and the execution of the innocent. You will note too much emphasis is placed

on the convicted murderer and not on the victim. The murderers get out of prison

early and murder again. There are evidence to both sides of the argument in whether

the death penalty is a deterrent or not. In question of the death penalty, I ask you to

weigh both sides of the argument carefully and make your decision based on the

action that will serve the best humanitarian purpose of criminal law.