I do not believe that
I can classify the death penalty as right or wrong. Instead I feel it is both necessary and just in today's
society. The editorial "Is the
Death Penalty Right or Wrong?" published in the most recent Campus Times is filled with many false
generalizations and incorrect assumptions that I will clarify and set
straight.
First,
I'd like to point out that the aforementioned editorial had very little factual
evidence to back its claims and the factual evidence it did have (In
Alabama...11 or 13 people executed in 1997 were black) had very little merit or
relevance. For example, the case of
Mumia Abu Jamal was mentioned in the editorial without one real reason why
Mumia "might be innocent".
Instead it was said that this is "one example of the death
penalty's racist nature" and that he was "targeted....and framed for
the murder..." Also, it was said
that in the U.S. justice system one "would discover extreme racism within
the justice system." However, the
statistics tell a different story.
Since 1976, 56% of the total executions have been of whites compared to
35% for blacks. However, blacks have
committed 47% of all murders as compared to 38% for whites. Thus, one can see that whites get executed
for their involvement in murder much more frequently (50%) than blacks
(<20%). This statement is clearly in
opposition to the idea that the death penalty is targeted more towards blacks
than whites (and thus racist).
Another
argument frequently brought up involves the cost or financial burden of a LWOP
(life without parole) sentence as compared to that of an execution. The claim was made that "to keep a
person in prison for life, including court fees, it costs $500, 000." This estimate is blatantly incorrect and when
calculated properly, a different story is seen. Assuming an average cost of $34, 000 year (which is highly
conservative according to Time's 2/4/97 findings that avg. cell cost nationwide
is $24, 000/yr. and maximum security cell cost is $75, 000/yr.) for 50 years at
a 2% annual cost increase (based on historical increases in prison costs, the
national inflation rate, medical costs (esp. geriatric) with true LWOP
sentences, and the risk/perceived risk of escape) and adding in $75, 000 for
trial and appeals costs, we come to a grand total of $3.01 million as the cost
of one LWOP case. An equivalent (i.e.
same case with a different sentence) death penalty case has a cost based on the
following: an average cost of $60,
000/yr for 8 years (the average waiting time for inmates from 1973-1994) at a
2% increase plus $1.5 million for trials and appeals comes to about $2 million,
a figure substantially less than the overall cost for a LWOP sentence (All
numbers are from Justice for All (JFA) calculations). Thus, one does not need to be a math major to see that the costs
associated with a death sentence are significantly lower than those of a LWOP
sentence.
The
idea of an innocent person being executed is one often used by anti-death
penalty proponents. This is true as
innocent people have been both executed and released from jail before being
executed. However, in an imperfect
world, certain measures or risks need to be taken in society to enhance overall
safety. As Steven D. Stewart (the
prosecuting attorney for Clark County Indiana) said, " It cheapens the
life of an innocent murder victim to say that society has no right to keep the
murderer from ever killing again. In my view, society has not only the right,
but the duty to act in self defense to protect the innocent." Sure, there are a very small number of
people that have been innocently executed (23 people since 1900 according to
the Bedau-Radelet Study). But, this number
pales in comparison to the number of innocent people that have been murdered by
already convicted murderers who have escaped/been released from jail. As the Stanford Law Review found "Of
the roughly 52,000 state prison inmates serving time for murder in 1984, an
estimated 810 had previously been convicted of murder and had killed 821
persons following their previous murder convictions. Executing each of these
inmates would have saved 821 lives." As John McAdams (Political Science
Professor at Marquette University) said, "If we execute murderers and
there is in fact no deterrent effect, we have killed a bunch of murderers. If
we fail to execute murderers, and doing so would in fact have deterred other
murders, we have allowed the killing of a bunch of innocent victims. I would
much rather risk the former. This, to me, is not a tough call."
Another
myth associated with the death penalty is the idea of a LWOP sentence. LWOP does not in all cases mean life in
prison without parole. Not only are
there the inherent risks of a prisoner murdering a guard, another inmate, or
another innocent person (after escaping from jail), but the even more frightful
idea that the inmate will be legally paroled.
This may seem impossible, but when the next legislative session meets
the parole laws can be changed and the prisoner being paroled despite the fact
that his sentence was life WITHOUT parole.
For example, one needs to look no further than the case James Moore who
raped and strangled 14 year-old Pamela Moss.
Moss’s parents (feeling some sort of compassion for this disgusting
individual) spared him the death penalty on the provision that he be sentenced
to life in prison. In 1982, sentencing
laws were changed (surprise, surprise) so that Moore is eligible for parole
every two years. According to Davis,
"Considering that a defendant sentenced to "life imprisonment"
now actually serves less than 8 years in prison, it is a good bet that
"life without parole" will not have the meaning intended as years go
by." Thus, one can see that the
death penalty is the only punishment that prevents parole boards and criminal
rights activists from giving the inmate a chance to repeat his crime.
"All human life should be valued"
or as Hall states, "We must think of the death penalty...as a violation of
the right to life." is another oft heard claim by death penalty
opponents. This argument indicates that
human life is characterized only by our physical traits. I disagree with this and instead believe
that there is a certain spiritual element that must be present in order to
consider someone part of humanity. Having
compassion and respect for innocent human life is what murderers do not have
and therefore justifies their lack of right to life that everyone else
has. The idea of valuing one's physical
traits over his spiritual traits (which is what people do when they say a
convicted murderer should not die simply because he is a human and has a right
to life like all people do) is in its simplest extent the idea of racism.
When
looking at all the aspects associated with the death penalty, I find it to be a
very necessary tool for maintaining our society's safety. I believe that carrying out an execution on
someone gives the message to the innocent victim "we believe that your
life was important, so important that we have decided to invoke the ultimate
punishment on the one who took yours away." In response to Hall's
statement "We must think of the death penalty not as a punishment..."
Davis sums it best, "I believe in capital punishment. I believe that there
are some defendants who have earned the ultimate punishment our society has to
offer by committing murder with aggravating circumstances present." We must be true and just both to the victims
and ourselves by advocating the use of the death penalty.