Essay Sample on Death Penalty: Unjust, Costly and Ineffective

Thesis Statement: The death penalty should be abolished as it does not reduce capital crimes; it is unjust and costly.

Introduction

Every country requires a sensible and practical criminal justice system that leads to a safe society. The death penalty fails to provide states with the best solution in addressing public safety and ensuring no more crimes committed. The state does not have the right to kill human beings and especially when it happens as a predetermination based on the law, and done in a discriminatory manner. It means that the death penalty's flaws are more evident when compared to other types of capital punishment. Therefore, abolishing the death penalty would provide a better basis for dealing with criminal cases that require extreme punishment, reduce costs, and help the justice system in concentrating energy, resources, and time to support the victims and families impacted by the crime. The essay argues in support of abolishing the death penalty as it does not reduce capital crimes. It is unjust and costly, irreversible, barbaric, and inhumane.

Narration and Confirmation

Death Penalty Does not Reduce or Prevent Capital Crimes

The death penalty is not applied consistently in states, and that limits its ability to deter crimes effectively. Effectiveness in the deterrence of capital crimes is determined by the certainty and frequency of applying the method of punishment. In the death penalty, the threat of executing perpetrators increases their criminal behavior compared to imprisonment or a life sentence with parole. The death penalty fails to deter capital crimes as it cannot be administered in a manner that meets the conditions of consistency and promptly. Supporters of the ban of the death penalty argue that the proportion of first degree murderers who are executed is tiny (American Civil Liberties Union, 2020). For instance, in the mid-1990s, death penalties increased to at least 300 each year. However, this number does not meet 1% of all the homicides reported to the police. Those convicted on criminal homicide were only 3% sentenced to death (Bureau of Justice Statistics, n.d). In the 2000s, the death sentences each year dropped to 137 on average, which indicated a reduced percentage when compared to the 1990s. Therefore, the small fraction of murderers who are convicted of capital crimes does not represent the "worst of worst" (American Civil Liberties Union, 2020).

Death Penalty is Unjust

The ethical point of view of the death penalty is unjust by failing to follow the constitutional due process of trial and sentencing that guarantees a person fundamental fairness. Court courts that have sentenced people using the death penalty have been established to do so in an arbitrary, unfair and racially biased way. For instance, racial bias in the death penalty in Furman was unconstitutional as it was based on racial bias. Negro criminals are highly executed with the death penalty when compared to the whites. According to Jack, Karin, and Kimberly (2015), racism is highly depicted in death penalty judgments. Death sentence produces divergent impact on rulings for black and white defendants. 80% of defendants in death sentence cases were blacks, and 56.5% were whites. That revealed the influence of race to jurors in making rulings for black defendants for death penalties. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (n.d) affirmed racial bias in death sentencing by showing that over 53% of the 4,220 prisoners who were executed in America between the years 1930 and 1996 were blacks. Thus, the severity of judgment and possible death penalty in courts is usually influenced by race. That is one way that makes the death penalty unfair and needs to be abolished.

Gender and socio-economic status of a person also determine the possibility of getting the death penalty. Women are less sentenced to death when compared to men. The Death Penalty Information Center (2020) denoted that women rarely receive a death sentence in the United States. Even with death penalties, women are seldom executed with this form of capital punishment. Only 51 women have been implemented in America since the year 1900, and 15 are blacks. By January, 2020, only 53 women were convicted with death sentence across America even though women committed 11 % of criminal homicides. That accounts for only 2% of the people sentenced to death in America (American Civil Liberties Union, 2020). Most of the blacks are poor. The death penalty discriminates against the poor racial minorities, which is a factor that determines fair counsel in courts. Achievement of fairness in murder cases requires competency of counsel on the side of the defendant. However, the poor people convicted with death sentence cannot afford to hire a lawyer when under trial (Bright, 1994). Poverty, lack of stable social background in the society, and insufficient legal representation of litigation are significant factors that contribute to defendants' getting a death penalty. It means that citizens would object to the death penalty and must be abolished based on its current practice, which is unfair.

Death Penalty is Costly

Compared to incarceration, which is considered more active, the death penalty is a more costly form of punishment. The associated costs of the death penalty makes it more expensive to execute than life imprisonment. It takes longer to complete a death penalty case, and this consumes more litigation costs that are rested on the taxpayer. There are also extra costs on the separate death execution activity, which adds to the cost. A case in Maryland revealed that the trial costs for death penalty cases were approximately 42% more when compared to those of non-death sentence cases (United States General Accounting Office, 1989). In Kansas, the legislature on reinstating the death penalty was voted against as the government determined that it will cost the taxpayer over $ 11 million within the first year of implementation (American Civil Liberties Union, 2020). Similar findings were revealed in North Carolina, as capital punishment is more expensive than other methods of incarceration, such as life imprisonment (Robinson, 2011). Adjudicating the death penalty in North California will cost the taxpayer an extra amount of $329,000 higher than litigating a 20-year term of imprisonment (Cook & Slawson, 1993). The costs of the death penalty that did not result in execution set an extra charge to exceed $2 million. Capital punishment should be abolished due to its high costs of litigation.

Counter Argument

Supporters of the death penalty argue that abolishing this capital punishment will mean that authorities do not take the crime seriously. The death penalty is still necessary when a nation is experiencing crimes that create fear of its people to a greater extend. Those who are advocating for abolishing the death penalty focus on concerns that are contradictory, including costs, fairness, and non-reduction of capital crimes (Kleinstuber, 2016). The move suggests that the exact problem of the death penalty is the due process and not the inhumane, degrading, and brutal manner that criminals are treated. Such a proposition does not refute the inhumane approach that life without parole and other death in prison incarceration sentences to capital criminals go through as an option for the death penalty (Burns, 2013). Death in prison through the alternatives of life sentence without parole is not reversible, just like the death penalty, and does not give an added level of justice to the perpetrator. However, compared to life without parole and other forms of sentences, the death penalty remains an undesirable capital punishment for any human being. Thus, it should be abolished due to additional costs incurred, the process of execution, which is barbaric and unfair, and is not capable of deterring crime in states.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the death penalty should be abolished due to its inability to achieve the objectives of a coherent and effective punishment towards capital crimes. It fails to provide the justice system with a fair process to the defendants based on race and social class. Furthermore, the increased costs of executing the death penalty put the approach as questionable in being implemented effectively by states. Even though some may argue for upholding of the death penalty as its objectives are not different from life without parole sentences, capital punishment is inhuman and barbaric. The effects of the death penalty on society do not produce the best results for deterring crime and upholding human rights through fairness. The increased costs of executing the death penalty place it as an unfavorable approach of punishment when compared to the alternatives.

References

American Civil Liberties Union. (2020). The case against the death penalty. https://www.aclu.org/other/case-against-death-penaltyBright, S. (1994). Counsel for the Poor: The Death Sentence Not for the Worst Crime but for the Worst Lawyer. The Yale Law Journal, 103(7), 1835-1883. doi:10.2307/797015

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (n.d). Publications and products: Capital punishment. https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&tid=0&dcid=0&sid=1&iid=0&sortby=&page=paging&curpg=2

Burns, R. (2013, March 22). Is life without parole any better than the death penalty? These Times. http://inthesetimes.com/article/14773/death_penalty_abolition_life_without_parole.

Cook, P., & Slawson, D. (1993). The costs of processing murder cases in North Carolina. Duke University. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/northcarolina.pdf

Death Penalty Information Center. (2020). Death row women: Current female death row prisoners. https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/death-row/women

Jack, G., Karin, M., & Kimberly, K. (2015). Possibility of Death Sentence Has Divergent Effect on Verdicts for Black and White Defendants. Law and Human Behavior, 39(6), 539–546. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000146

Kleinstuber, R., Joy, S., & Mansley, E. (2016, October 21). Into the abyss: The unintended consequences of death penalty abolition. Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1196&context=jlasc

Robinson, M. (2011). The death penalty in North Carolina: A summary of the data and scientific studies. A policy report prepared for the North Carolina General Assembly. https://files.deathpenaltyinfo.org/legacy/files/pdf/Robinson_Matt_2011_NCDeathPenaltyStudy.pdf

United States General Accounting Office. (1989). Criminal justice: Limited data available on the costs of death sentences. https://www.gao.gov/assets/220/211785.pdf