FREE ESSAY ON DEATH PENALTY

DEATH PENALTY

Capital Punishment: Injustice of Society
Looking out for the state of the public's satisfaction in the scheme of capital
sentencing does not
Constitute serving justice. Today's system of capital punishment is fought with
inequalities and
Injustices. The commonly offered arguments for the death penalty are filled with holes.
It was a
Deterrent. It removed killers. It was the ultimate punishment. It is biblical. It
satisfied the public's need
For retribution. It relieved the anguish of the victim's family. (Grisham 120)
Realistically, imposing the
Death penalty is expensive and time consuming. Retroactively, it has yet to be proven as
a deterrent.
Morally, it is a continuation of the cycle of violence and o...degrades all who are
involved in its
Enforcement, as well as its victim. (Stewart 1) 
Perhaps the most frequent argument for capital punishment is that of deterrence. The
prevailing
Thought is that imposition of the death penalty will act to dissuade other criminals from
committing
Violent acts. Numerous studies have been created attempting to prove this belief;
however, to the
Evidence taken together makes it hard to be confident that capital punishment deters more
than long
Prison terms do. (Cavanagh 4) Going ever farther, Bryan Stevenson, the executive director
of the
Montgomery based Equal Justice Initiative, has stated that people are increasingly
realizing that the
More we resort to killing as a legitimate response to our frustration and anger with
violence, the more
Violent our society becomes. We could execute all three thousand people on death row, and
most
People would not feel any safer tomorrow. (Frame 51) In addition, with the growing
humanitarianism
Of modern society, the number of inmates actually put to death is substantially lower
than 50 years
Ago. This decline creates a situation in which the death penalty ceases to be a deterrent
when the
Populace begins to think that one can get away with a crime and go unpunished. Also, the
less that the
Death sentence is used; the more it becomes unusual, thus coming in conflict with the
eighth
Amendment. This is essentially a paradox, in which the less the death penalty is used,
the less society
Can legally use it. The end result is a punishment that ceases to deter any crime at all.

The key part of the death penalty is that it involves death-something, which is rather
permanent for
Humans, due to the concept of mortality. This creates a major problem when there continue
to be
Many instances of innocent people being sentenced to death. (Tabak 38) In our legal
system, there
Exist numerous ways in which justice might be poorly served for a recipient of the death
sentence.
Foremost is in the handling of his own defense counsel. In the event that a defendant is
without
Counsel, a lawyer will be provided. Attorney's appointed to represent indigent capital
defendants
Frequently lack the qualities necessary to provide a competent defense and sometimes have
exhibited
Such poor character that they have subsequently been disbarred. (Tabak 37). With payment
caps or
Court determined sums of, for example, $5 an hour; there is not much incentive for a
lawyer to spend
A great deal of time was representing a capital defendant. When you compare this to the
prosecution,
Aided by the police, other law enforcement agencies, crime labs, state mental hospitals,
various
Other scientific resources, prosecutors experienced in successfully handling capital
cases,
Compulsory process, and grand juries (Tabak 37), the defense that the court appointed
counsel can
Offer is puny. If, in fact, a defendant has a valid case to offer, what chance has he to
offer it and have
It properly recognized. Furthermore, why should he be punished for a misjustice that was
created by?
The court itself when it appointed the incapable lawyer. Even if a defendant has proper
legal counsel,
There is still the matter of impartiality of judges. The Supreme Court has steadily
reduced the
Availability of habeas corpus review of capital convictions, placing its confidence in
the notion that
State judges, who take the same oath of office as federal judges to uphold the
Constitution, can be
Trusted to enforce it. (Bright 768) This makes for the biased trying of a defendant's
appeals, given
The overwhelming pressure on elected state judges to heed, and perhaps even lead to, the
popular cries
For the death of criminal defendants. (Bright 769) Thirty two of the states that impose
the death
Penalty also employ the popular election of judges, and several of these even have judges
run with
Party affiliations. This creates a deeply political justice system-the words alone are a
paradox. Can
Society simply brush off mistaken execution as an incidental cost in the greater scheme
of putting a
Criminal to death? Revenge is an unworthy motive for our society to pursue. (Whittier 1)
In our
Society, there is a great expectation placed on the family of a victim to pursue
vengeance to the highest
Degree-the death penalty. Pat Bane, executive director of the Murder Victims Families
for
Reconciliation (MVFR), stated, One parent told me that people made her feel like she was
betraying
Her son because she did not want to kill the person who murdered him. (Frame 50) This
creates a
Dilemma of morality. If anything, by forcing families to seek the death penalty, their
own consciences
Will be burdened by the death of the killer. Furthermore, killing him will not bring back
your
Son [s]. (Grisham 402). At some point, man must stop the violence. Seeking temporary
gratification is
Not a logical basis for whether the death penalty should be imposed. Granted, revenge is
easily
Confused with retribution, and most would agree that the punishment should fit the crime,
but can
Society really justifies murdering someone else simply on the basis that they deserved
it? Government
Has the right and duty to protect the greater good against people who jeopardize the
welfare of
Society, but a killer can be sentenced to life without chance of parole, and society will
be just as safe
As if he had been executed. 
A vast misconception concerning the death penalty is that it saves society the costs of
keeping
Inmates imprisoned for long periods. In the act of preserving due process of justice, the
court appeals
Involved with the death penalty becomes a long, drawn-out and very expensive process. The
average
Time between sentencing and execution for the 31 prisoners put on death row in 1992 was
114
Months, or nine and a half years. (Stewart 50) Criminal justice process expenses, trial
court costs,
Appellate and post-conviction costs, and prison costs perhaps including years served on
death row
Awaiting execution... all told, the extra costs per death penalty imposed in over a
quarter million
Dollars, and per execution exceeds $2 million. (Cavanagh 4) When you compare this to the
average
Costs for a twenty-year prison term for first-degree murder (roughly $330 thousand), the
cost of
Putting someone away for life is a deal. Is it really worth the hassle and money to kill
a criminal, when?
We can put them away for life for less money with a great deal more ease? In earlier
times-where
Capital punishment was common, the value of life was less, and societies were more
barbaric-capital
Punishment was probably quite acceptable. However, in today's society, which is becoming
ever
More increasingly humanitarian and individual rights and due process of justice are held
in high
Accord, the death penalty is becoming an unrealistic form of punishment. Also, with the
ever present
Possibility of mistaken execution, there will remain the question of innocence of those
put to death.
Finally, man is not a divine being. He does not have the right to inflict mortal
punishment in the name
Of society's welfare, when there are suitable substitutes that requires fewer resources.
I ask society,
...Why don't we stop the killing? (Grisham 404) 
Bibliography 
Grisham, John. The Chamber. New York: Island Books, 1994. 
Stewart, David O. Dealing with Death. American Bar Association Journal 80.11 (1994): 50 
Tabak, Ronald J. Report: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel and Lack of Due Process in
Death
Penalty Cases. Human Rights 22.Winter (1995): 36 
Whittier, Charles H. Moral Arguments For and Against Capital Punishment. CRS Report for
Congress (1996): 1