Is There a Place for the Death Penalty in the Modern United States?
INTRODUCTION
A man in a plain orange jumpsuit is led down a long hallway of dark cells, surrounded by a number of armed guards, his feet and arms shackled. They enter a small room, with a number of windows, and several officially dressed men. This is this man’s execution. From here, he may be strapped into an electric chair, led onto the gallows, or prepared for lethal injection. The means of capital punishment may differ from state to state, as well as, and debate whether or not capital punishment, or death penalty, should be a legal outcome of criminal convictions, regardless of crime. The arguments for and against the death penalty is extensive and long-lasting; both sides make a number of strong points, which means that continuing discussion and research is worthwhile. However, there are people sitting on death row or serving life-sentences who have committed heinous, deviant, unbelievable crimes, sometimes many such crimes. These people are not redeemable, they cannot be rehabilitated, and we are warehousing these people with the highest and most likely threat to the public. For example, serial killers, sociopaths or psychopaths, cannot be “fixed.” These people not only were found guilty, they are proud of their crimes, and would gladly do so again if given the opportunity. There is no question of guilt or innocence. The death penalty does have a place in the modern American Criminal Justice System under certain circumstances; when absolute certainty of the commission of certain crimes under certain conditions. In other words, the death penalty should never be an arbitrary consequence but it, also, should not be taken off the table completely as an option in the case of certain convicted individuals. So the position of the research and evidence, on this topic, verifies that the Death Penalty in the United States is still a necessity.
DISCUSSION
Executions for the commission of crimes are hardly a new concept. From the beginning of civilization human beings have established systems of laws and rules that when not followed are associated with consequences (Reggio 1). By today’s standards the earliest forms of execution might be seen as horrendous or tortuous, and sometimes they certainly were. Beheadings, unsuccessful hangings, and crucifixions are all incredibly unethical and inhumane consequences in the modern United States. Today, the United States has considered and practiced a number of new forms of execution (Alexander 1). Technology in many ways aided in the possibility of such means. The electric chair, the gas chamber, and lethal injection are the most common modern means of execution. Since the 1970s, more than 130 people have been executed in the United States (Amnesty International USA 1). Each and everyone have been debated concerning their ethics and whether or not they could be considered inhumane. At the core of the great debate that separate the two sides is the question, is there any means of execution that can be considered ethical and should it be an optional consequence in the justice system?
Those who oppose the death penalty believe that execution is unethical because it taking a life is a form of vengeance, the potential for errors could result in the death of the innocent, and believe that the justice system is too easily swayed by the financial benefits of executions, which devalues life (Amnesty International USA 1). In fairness, no one is arguing that everyone, even murderers, should be arbitrarily executed without the proper investigation and proof needed to confirm actual guilt, No one in any branch of the criminal justice system wants innocent people to be executed. No one is arguing that the reasoning behind supporting the death penalty should be done so based on the financial pros and cons of housing a given inmate. The death penalty should only be considered in the most severe, unredeemable cases, where release is not an option and threat remains forever high.
One aspect of the majority of executions conducted in the United States allows a viewing audience to an execution. This audience is generally made up of officials, family members of the inmate, the family whose was wronged by their crime, and sometimes members of the press. This does raise a lot of “red flags,” when addressing the issue of whether there is an unethical vengeance issue in capital punishment (Guernsey and et. al 1). No one can tell others how to feel or how to view the watching of an execution. However, the carrying out of a sentence as severe as the ending of a life should not be open to a public display; it should not provide entertainment or anyone’s need for revenge. It is a serious legal action that is being carried out and should be done so with efficiency and little attention or media coverage. As a supporter of the death penalty, it is not just about the crime committed but about the potential danger they continue to pose.
The death penalty, unfortunately, is still a necessity in our modern society. There are people in the world that for psychological or physiological conditions that make them once and always a threat to the majority (Blecker 1). A fine example, a comparative ethical scenario, what if someone carried a deadly disease, the only way to absolutely guaranteed that the disease will not be a threat is to end the life of the man. This man is not a criminal, but he poses a risk to the larger community, and there is no altering that fact. What is a society, however ethical and progressive, supposed to do? The proper application of the death penalty is not so very different. Sometimes living in large society requires harsh decisions that are necessary to protect that society (Alexander 1). The death penalty is one of those necessary evils that still have a place in the modern paradigm. However, there a many necessary reforms and innovations that needs to be made to make certain that all ethical and human standards are being met. Certainty of guilt must be identified, the perpetrator’s mental condition and the nature of their crime considered, the means of that execution must be the fastest and most lethal, and finally, such sentences should not be open to viewing of any kind.
There is no question that the death penalty is the most severe of punishments that could ever be imposed on a human being and should never be taken lightly and arbitrarily carried out. Modern medicine has taught us that there are some people who will never learn from their mistakes, feel guilt and regret for what they have done, and openly and happily admit that if released they would continue to commit crimes (Blecker 1). Has keeping dangerous psyches like Charles Manson alive, in solitary, for the last decades been beneficial to anyone? He has not changed, in fact, some might argue his isolation has made him more unpredictable, but he does not regret the influence that he had on the “Manson Family” member who murdered on his orders. If ever released he would no doubt do the same. Would the world be any different had he been executed in the 1960s? The answer is no. When someone is not only noncontributory to society, but is, also, a continuous threat to the public, then that life can and should be forfeit for the greater good. While the death penalty should never be the first choice, it should be available in the cases that most warrant it.
CONCLUSION
Ethical arguments are the hardest kind, because in most cases it is a matter of people all trying to do the right thing and make the right choices; the only problem is that they cannot all agree on what that is. The death penalty is not and should not be on the table without control factors and policies that makes certain that it is not misused. Again, the death penalty should only be considered when the situation involves a perpetrator that cannot be redeemed or rehabilitated, individuals that will always present a continuous threat. That said the capital punishment does have a place in modern America and should not be eliminated as an option under specific circumstances and specific crimes. It would be ideal if we lived in a world where just the threat of the death penalty was enough to deter all crime and that biology, psychology, and evolution did not produce individuals whose behavior can never be trusted. However, we would be foolish not to acknowledge that danger and take the steps necessary to protect the innocent, general public from these individuals, The death penalty is not an ideal solution, but it is the most practical and efficient means to the desired end, which is the protection of society.
WORK CITED
Alexander, Katherine. "Ethics Inquiry: October 2010." Brandeis University: International Center for Ethics, Justice, and Public Life. (2012): 1. Web. 14 Nov. 2014. <http://www.brandeis.edu/ethics/ethicalinquiry/2010/october.html>.
Blecker, Robert. “The Death Penalty Needs to Be an Option for Punishment.” New York Times. (2014). 1. Web. 14 Nov. 2014. < http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/04/06/what-it-means-if-the-death-penalty-is-dying/the-death-penalty-needs-to-be-an-option-for-punishment>.
Guernsey, Jo Ann Bren, and et. al. "Death Penalty: Historical Timeline." ProCon Organization. 2014: 1. Web. 14 Nov. 2014. <http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.timeline.php?timelineID=000025>.
Reggio, Michael H. "History of the Death Penalty." PBS. 2014: 1. Web. 14 Nov. 2014. <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/execution/readings/history.html>.
Amnesty International USA, . "Know the Facts About Capital Punishment." U.S> Death penalty Facts. Amnesty International USA, n.d. Web. 14 Nov 2014. <http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts>.
