The Death Penalty as Just Punishment
Does Capital Punishment Deter or is it a Biased Process?
Sep 3, 2008
Capital punishment has been administered in this country for over 200 years, however, some states have now abolished the practice, while others continue with sanctioned executions.
Racial Bias
The most famous statistical study conducted regarding racial bias in death penalty assessment was the 1970s Baldus study. The study indicated if a murder victim was white, the rate to which the offender was sentenced to death was much higher than if the victim was black (Howe, The Futile Quest for Racial Neutrality in Capital Selection and the Eighth Amendment Argument for Abolition Base on Unconscious Racial Discrimination, William and Mary Law Review, 2004, 2085).
In a more recent study, capital sentencing in Maryland between 1978 and 1999 was examined. The study found “pronounced bias against killers of white victims, and within the white-victim cases, additional bias against black offenders” (Howe, 2090).
Alternatively, a 2001 study of 900 death penalty cases indicated racial bias is not a factor in capital sentencing. It stated, “differences in state criminal laws, prosecutors; decisions and geographical factors, not intentional racial bias, account for the fact that the majority of offenders with death sentences are minorities” (Klug, Inter Alia. Study of Racial And Geographical Disparities in Federal Death Penalty System, Corrections Compendium, 2001, 1).
The majority of executed death row inmates since 1976 have been white, even though a slight majority of murders are committed by blacks (Eddlem, Ten Anti-Death Penalty Fallacies: The Case Against Capital Punishment Relies on Myth, Misinformation, and Misplaced Emotionalism, The New American, 2002, 24).
Does the Death Penalty Act as a Deterrent?
Another argument used by those against the death penalty is that executions do not deter criminals on the street from committing further acts of mayhem, murder, and violence.
According to C.S. Lewis, “If deterrence is all that matters, the execution of an innocent man, provided the public think him guilty, would be fully justified (Eddlem, 25). As Eddlem (2002) asserts, “Men should be punished for their own crimes and not merely to deter others…the death penalty undoubtedly does deter in some cases. For starters, those executed will no longer be around to commit any more crimes” (26).
The renowned member of the O.J. Simpson “Dream Team” of attorneys, Alan Dershowitz, is a strong opponent of the death penalty, and has stated, “Of course, the death penalty deters some crimes…. That’s why you have to pay more for a hitman in a death penalty state, than a nondeath penalty state” (Bedau & Cassell, Debating the Death Penalty: Should America Have Capital Punishment? The Experts on Both Sides Make Their Best Case, 2004, 191). Therefore, the true question is not “whether the death penalty deters every murder, only whether it deters some murders” (Bedau & Cassell, 190).
DNA Exoneration
Some claim death row is full of innocent men and recent releases due to new DNA evidence is proof of this assertion. According to ABC News (2000), “618 prisoners have been executed across the nation and about 80 have been exonerated…. Those disturbing odds beg the question: If the chances of executing an innocent person are so high, should we have capital punishment?” (Eddlem, 24).
Yet, since 1976, “not one person in the United States has been later proven innocent as a result of DNA evidence” (Eddlem, 24). This means only 13 percent of death row inmates across the country in 2000 were found to be innocent via this testing.
The justice system was designed to deal with all individuals equally. Capital punishment has been a method of punishment for centuries in this country. It is not pleasant to think about, but it may be a necessary evil in our society to punish and deter those who would unjustly take the life of another.
 |
