Humanity has always struggled with several inconveniences and there are constantly disagreements on how to deal with them. One of the biggest concerns of societies is how to solve the problem of …

[Moustapha Floyd]

    Humanity has always struggled with several inconveniences and there are constantly disagreements on how to deal with them. One of the biggest concerns of societies is how to solve the problem of criminality. The means and methods used sometimes seem contradictory to the way the problem should be properly solved. Some claim that capital punishment is a good way to deter crime and they believe that it should remain active because it saves lives. Based on their studies, they confirm that the death penalty deter numbers of murders. However, the death penalty should be abolished because it violates human rights; sometimes innocent people are often executed and it shows no evidence for deterrence of crime.

     Those who support capital punishment declare that this type of punishment deters criminals from committing murders and as a result more lives are saved. David Muhlhausen, who wrote the article The death Penalty Should Not Be Abolished, starts off by saying that people make their choices based on the costs and benefits of a matter. Therefore criminals being aware of the risk of being apprehended and executed as punishment will forbear of committing crime. Recent studies by several university professors have shown that there is a strong link between capital punishment and the decrease of crime rates. Those researches, using panel data techniques have ratified that “each additional execution appears to deter between three and eighteen murders”. It is said that some scholars who originally contested the capital punishment rethought about it after seeing the results of the studies proving deterrence of crime through executions. Carr R. Sunstein, Professor in the University of Chicago wrote: If the recent evidence of deterrence is shown to be correct, then opponents of capital punishment will face an uphill struggle on moral grounds. If each execution is saving lives, the harms of capital punishment would have to be very great to justify its abolition, far greater than most critics have heretofore alleged.

     Although studies showed that the death penalty saves lives, there is not enough evidence proving how. Aside from that, there are some other factors to take into consideration. Firstly, capital punishment violates fundamental human rights.  Amnesty International, an organization focused on protecting human rights, declares that “no matter what reason a government gives for executing prisoners and what method of execution is used, the death penalty cannot be separated from the issue of human rights.” The Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes each person’s right to life and states further that no one shall be tortured or be subjected to inhuman punishment and treatment. It is obvious that capital punishment violates these rights. Capital Punishment supporters claim that executions, in some cases, can be seen as self-defense. However, “the death penalty is not an act of self-defense against an immediate threat to life” Amnesty International claims. There is no justification for torture and cruel treatment or punishment. The death penalty is not even a punishment since the subject no longer lives after the execution.The death penalty’s biggest danger is executing an innocent. Criminal justice systems are made of human beings and we all know that nobody isn't perfect; this implies that mistakes can be done and so innocent prisoners can be executed. “Those executed cannot be compensated for loss of life” --Amnesty International. When a prisoner is subjected to capital punishment by the court, even if proof of innocence is found later or before the execution, this prisoner is sort of killed mentally anyway. The psychological suffering caused by fore-knowledge of death is a scar that may never disappear in the prisoner’s life.

    Capital punishment, seen as a violation of human rights, has never proven to have any strong effects of decrease of murder. According to Amnesty International “. . .Nor is there evidence that the threat of the death penalty will prevent acts of terror." Some people consider the death penalty as a retribution for a particular murder. When it is seen like this, instead of bringing closure, “. . . it forever ties the victim’s survivors and the entire society to the act of ritualistic revenge killing” Herron claims. It is obvious that in case of retribution, murder will continue instead of stopping because both sides will want to win the battle. Capital punishment does not provide society with better safety but further delinquency. The South African Constitution Court states:We would be deluding ourselves if we were to believe that the execution of a comparatively few people each year will provide the solution to the unacceptably high rate of crime. The greatest deterrent to crime is the likelihood that offenders will be apprehended, convicted and punished.

     Capital punishment is a symbol of terror that violates the right to live – one of the most fundamental rights. Not only is it a violation of the Universal Declaration of the Human Rights, but it also encourages brutalization instead of peace in society. As Amnesty International points out: “An execution cannot be used to condemn killing; it is killing.” Society can secure itself through other means like sentencing murderers to die in prison instead of subjecting them to executions. Herron says that we can punish those who commit murder without putting ourselves in the business of committing murder. Thankfully, two-thirds of the countries in the world now have abolished capital punishment. This is a good sign, but not great enough. The death penalty should be abolished all around the world.

 

Herron, Aundre M. "The Death Penalty Does Not Deter Crime." Crime and Criminals. Ed. James D. Torr. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2004. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "The Death Penalty Is Not Civilized." Sacramento Bee 20 Apr. 2008. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context.

Amnesty  International. "The Death Penalty Should Be Abolished." Criminal Justice. Ed. David Haugen and Susan Musser. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "The Death Penalty v. Human Rights: Why Abolish the Death Penalty?" 2007. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context.

Muhlhausen, David B. "The Death Penalty Should Not Be Abolished." Criminal Justice. Ed. David Haugen and Susan Musser. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "The Death Penalty Deters Crime and Saves Lives." Heritage Foundation. 2007. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context.