090331001 Capital Punishment

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

The
first and foremost of the three major steps to prevent immoral
activities in a society is to teach the people of that society to the
extent that they consider from within their hearts that the subject
activity is immoral and one should restrain from getting involved in
such an activity. No society comprises of wholly good people and the
level of perception varies from individual to individual. Similarly,
it cannot be said that any society only has bad people in it.
Societies are always a mixture of many kinds of persons. Therefore,
it is not appropriate to consider that the teachings would have the
same effect on each and every individual of a community or society.
As such, it becomes necessary, for those who are responsible, to
restrict access to resources which could give rise to immoral
activities. This could again be something very difficult or
impossible to practically seal out such resources. With easy access
to resources which are required to do something good, one could
easily mend them for subversive uses. Punishments come into the
process, of correcting which was not corrected otherwise, as a last
resort when every other effort had failed.

Not
only with regards to capital punishment but to all sorts of them, it
would be unjustified to punish any individual for the committed
wrongdoing unless the first two steps have been executed in their
true spirit. As such, it can easily be deduced that a person does not
deserve punishment unless he or she had been properly notified of the
consequences and there were all the necessary efforts made to keep
the person away from harmful act. Telling or teaching someone not to
steal is good but not good enough. You don’t have to leave your
cash out in the street because you think everyone now believes that
stealing is bad. By doing so you would be putting one’s
temptation on trial and that is not fair as well. Someone might be
tempted to steal purely because of an urgent need. Therefore, in a
society where access to arms is not only unrestricted but allowed and
encouraged or there are not enough measures by the government to
protect the lives and property of individuals and they are forced to
take defensive measures, there is always a likelihood that anarchy
would prevail. For as much, we should consider twice before
committing anyone to capital punishment, had we fulfilled our
responsibility. Moreover, what is to be gained by capital punishment?
Two things come to mind when one faces that question, correction (of
society) and compensation (for the loved ones of victim).

Why
do nations go to war? Certainly not to capture prisoners of war and
feed them for the rest of the duration the dialogs go on. Nations go
to war as a last resort when all efforts fail to achieve what they
consider necessary. Wars are a means of correcting the opponent
nations or making them see what we believe is right. Every soldier
out there knows that he is to kill or else be killed. Similarly,
punishments are a means of correction when every other effort fails.

Capital
punishment or death penalty is a process of executing convicted
criminal under the authority of government. United States is one of
the 74 countries which allow death penalty and it stands fourth in
the number of criminals executed each year. It has become an
international issue and its unpredictable results concerning legal,
moral and economical issues are discussed throughout the world. The
main debatable issues concerning capital punishment are regarding the
effectiveness of capital punishment to serve as deterrent against
crime, ethical and moral standing of executions sanctioned by
government, likelihood of errors of judgment and prejudiced biasing.
These discussions are normally categorized into two classes, public
opinion and legislative issues. Public opinion relates to issues of
capital punishment being religiously or morally right or wrong, or to
the usefulness of it. Legislative issues are concerned about the
death penalty in relation to national laws, and whether government
agencies are capable of administering penalties in accordance with
the law (Issitt).

Besides
the philosophical reasoning the weaknesses in our legal system lend
much support to those who oppose capital punishment. After a New
Hampshire court awarded death sentence, first ever after fifty years,
to Michael Addison for killing a police officer,
the house elected to do away with death penalty after three
months of the sentence by a vote of 193 to 174. Democrat Gov. John
Lynch said he would veto the bill. The opponents of capital
punishment questioned the fairness after a millionaire, John Brooks,
received a life sentence for killing a repairman through hired
killers. They say that Addison could not afford a lawyer or else he
would not have been sentenced for death (THE ASSOCIATED PRESS).

About
74 nations still enforce death penalty and another 25 nations still
have laws supporting capital punishment but have not enforced them
through the last decade. 86 nations have abolished capital punishment
for all crimes. US was ranked fourth with 59 executions in 2004m
whereas, China stood out on the top with 3,400 executions in 2004
followed by Iran and Vietnam. According to a poll in 2006, 71%
Americans favor death penalty for some crimes while 65% do not
consider it to be immoral (Issit).

The
issue of death penalty as deterrent remains controversial.
Statistical studies show that number of violent crimes has decreased
with increase in number of executions, in United States. The
controversy takes its roots from the fact that it has been indicated
that crime rates are lower in states where capital punishment has
been abolished. Those for and against, both, have not yet been able
to bring forward evidence which can conclusively support their point
of view regarding capital punishment being a deterrent.

Support
for death penalty shows a downward trend in United States over the
past twenty years. Some people have escaped the horror of death
penalty with the help of DNA technology. This has made many minds
doubtful about competency of our legal system. In a Congressional
ruling of 2004, all inmates on death row were declared eligible for
further investigation where DNA evidence was available.

The
question of fairness of judgment has also been raised as studies show
that race and status have had their effect judgments. Both sides have
argued by quoting examples from history but the moral issues
regarding capital punishment are a matter of personal opinion.

Let’s
put our differences aside for a short while and look at the problem
rationally. Most of the literature available on the subject indicates
that more people are against capital punishment because of unfairness
in this regard and the torture that the inmates have to go through.
“From this day forward, I no longer shall tinker with the
machinery of death,” wrote United States Supreme Court Justice
Harry A. Blackmun in renouncing his support for the death penalty as
a constitutional means of punishment. In February 1994, Blackmun
dissented in the court’s decision in Callins v. Collins.
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the majority opinion,
upholding the constitutionality of the death penalty (Zimring).

The
basic reason why the movement against capital punishment is gaining
support is that many times innocent people have been executed.
Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said in a speech in 2001 to
a group of women lawyers in Minnesota that "the system may well
be allowing some innocent defendants to be executed." In 1997
American Bar Association, which does not side with any party, for or
against capital punishment, passed a resolution to halt capital
punishment “to minimize the risk that innocent persons may be
executed.” Acceptance of DNA testing is another major factor
that has brought the question of innocence to limelight (Innocence
and the Death Penalty).

Whatever
the reasons may be but states are thinking about their policies
regarding capital punishments. The backing of Catholics and other
movements is turning the tide against capital punishment in United
States (Mulvaney).

In
one particular case a Northwestern University undergraduate from
investigative journalism class, along with her other classmates,
unearthed the truth about an eyewitness and proved that the she could
not have seen whatever was claimed to be seen and thus saved a person
who was already on a death row. Thirteen other such investigations
resulted in exonerations in Illinois when George Ryan was governor of
the state. Later, Ryan called a moratorium on state’s death
penalty (White).

The
legislative issues related with capital punishment have been
politicized to an extent that they have lost their spirit (Gordon).
May it be those in favor or may it be those against. Both sides lack
rudimentary rationalism in their arguments. Those against have taken
the support of religion and though religion might not have played its
part in other fields but it seems very active and spirited in
abolishing of capital punishment (White). Had religion played the
role which it was required to play then there might not have been as
many cases of people facing death penalty.

Those
in favor have not enough arguments to convince the other side. As a
result, those in favor of capital punishment are losing support
gradually and it seems that abolishment of capital punishment is not
far away in this country.

Despite
lack of evidence from either side one thing is very prominent, the
society is yet not ripe to allow capital punishment. There are too
many weaknesses in our legal system and it is far from being fair to
prisoners on a death row. Though many have been exonerated but there
is a possibility that many innocent might have gone to the gallows
because of these weaknesses in our legal system. One such case is of
Paris Carriger. He was released in January 1999 after remaining on
death row for 21 years for the murder of Robert Gibson Shaw.
Carriger’s ordeal, spanning over a period of 21 years
(Carriger), should suffice to convince us that even after centuries
of efforts we were unable to evolve a system based on fairness to
all. Going through Carriger’s recollections pose another
question regarding the cruelty faced by prisoners on death row. How
can we expect a man to live a normal life after keeping him on a
death row for 21 years.

Even
before we attempt to answer the question regarding capital
punishment, we should rather ask ourselves, “How many more
Carrigers are we willing to produce?”

Works
Cited

THE
ASSOCIATED PRESS. "New Hampshire: Vote To Repeal Death Penalty."
New York Times (26 Mar. 2009): 20. Academic Search Elite.
EBSCO. 31 Mar. 2009

<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=afh&AN=37156624&site=ehost-live>.

Carriger, Paris. "REQUIEM FOR JUSTICE: REFLECTIONS ON 21 YEARS
OF DEATH ROW." Contemporary Justice Review 2.13 (Dec.
1999): 437. Points of View Reference Center. EBSCO. 31 Mar.
2009
<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pwh&AN=4012848&site=pov-live>.

"Innocence and the Death Penalty." America 07 Feb.
2005: 3. Points of View Reference Center. EBSCO. 31 Mar. 2009
<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pwh&AN=15863771&site=pov-live>.

Gordon, Diana R. "Justice Watch: Executioners' Songs."
Nation 251.3 (08 Oct. 1990): 373. Points of View Reference
Center. EBSCO. 31 Mar. 2009
<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pwh&AN=10416227&site=pov-live>.

"Innocence and the Death Penalty." America 07 Feb.
2005: 3. Points of View Reference Center. EBSCO. 31 Mar. 2009
<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pwh&AN=15863771&site=pov-live>.

Issitt, Micha L. "Death Penalty: An Overview." Points of
View: Death Penalty (Feb. 2007): 1. Points of View Reference
Center. EBSCO. 31 Mar. 2009
<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pwh&AN=22841133&site=pov-live>.

Mulvaney, Patrick. "States rethink death penalty as national
tide turns." National Catholic Reporter 43.2 (16 Mar.
2007): 5. Points of View Reference Center. EBSCO. 31 Mar. 2009
<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pwh&AN=24521455&site=pov-live>.

White, Michele Marie. "Documentary explores debate on death
penalty." National Catholic Reporter 40.0 (16 July 2004):
21. Points of View Reference Center. EBSCO. 31 Mar. 2009
<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pwh&AN=13760803&site=pov-live>.

Zimring,
Franklin E. "Capital Punishment." Microsft Encarta 2009.
DVD. Prod. Microsoft Corporation. Redmond, 2008.