Chan 1

Yin Mei Chan

Gardner

Hon. English 10 1°

6 May 2014

Capital Punishment: Justice or Retribution?

In the 21st century, capital punishment has made a mark on our country. In 1972, the

United States Supreme Court ruled capital punishment as a violation of the country's own

commandment—the Eighth Amendment—arguing the action as cruel and unusual. The

procedure was thus nationally outlawed. It was, however, reinstated in 1976; only this time,

individual states were given the privilege to determine their own verdict for the survival of

capital punishment. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, a non-profit

organization, 18 of the nation's 50 states have already eradicated capital punishment from their

governmental policies, leaving the remaining 32 states with the big question: should we do so

too?

Capital punishment is a means for providing justice to the victims of indefensible crime;

thus, many argue that for a crime of great brutality, capital punishment is unquestionably

obligatory. Essentially, advocates of capital punishment, such as Jonathan Kay, consider any

ruthless crime, such as the slaughter of an unarmed family, a purpose for the employment of

execution. They follow the common ideology "an eye for an eye," claiming that an action in

which results with a death can simply be vindicated through yet another death (Greg Dobbs).

Additionally, supporters of the death penalty oppose the idea that the death penalty should be

annulled due to its failure as a deterrent to crime. Some simply reject the claim that it is not a

preventative of crime, meaning they believe the existence of capital punishment successfully

Chan 2

diminishes the rate of misconduct throughout the nation; however, some agree with the claim,

but maintain their general opinion that capital punishment is necessary (Dobbs). In this case,

supporters propose that even though capital punishment may not serve as a deterrent to crime,

the life sentence does not either; thus the argument that the death penalty should be abolished

due to its inability to reduce crime is merely invalid. In summation, the death penalty can be

supported with reasonable aims; however the policy should remain under question of

abolishment due to its heavy weight of unethicality, uncertainty, and unlawfulness.

Indisputably, a lesser punishment serves no more of a deterrent to crime as capital

punishment. Regarding this aspect, the common argument revolves around one question: what

does this mean for the necessity of the death penalty? Capital punishment should not be

continued by the government because without collective purpose, the ending of a life appears no

more beneficial than other reprimands. In the article "End Capital Punishment," published by

Buffalo News, a journalist rebuts the need of capital punishment, arguing it only as advantageous

as a less punitive sentence:

The need for retribution is great among humans and, properly channeled, it has its

place. But we are not slaves to our urges and when the death penalty is shown to

be unreliable, when it is shown to be unfairly applied, when its imposition allows

for no correction, when other acceptable punishments are available, it is

government's responsibility to take notice and to act. Other forms of punishment

will get the job done well enough, including life in prison without parole. (SIRS

Issues Researcher)

The article suggests that replacing capital punishment with life in prison without parole

insures the loved ones of a victim, as well as the victims themselves, the comfort and knowledge

Chan 3

that the individual allegedly responsible for the crime is behind bars— under close watch and

severe punishment. Equally, the defendant is not stripped of their chance at justice either, as they

would be protected from irreversible penance. As explained in the article, other sentences exist

that ensure the equivalent justice, if not more, that the death penalty does.

Moreover, it has been proven that numerous defendants have been wrongfully sentenced

to death row. Once portrayed as the offender, Kirk Bloodsworth successfully reversed his image,

advising the nation that he is in fact, the victim—the victim of fault. Bloodsworth explains his

story in the McClatchy-Tribune News Service column, "My Case Shows the Need to Abolish the

Death Penalty." He shares that "almost exactly 20 years ago, [he] became the first death row

prisoner in the United States to clear [his] name" from reprimand. More specifically,

Bloodsworth points out that since the 1976 reinstatement of capital punishment, "142 of us

[alleged offenders] have been exonerated from death row. That's 142 innocent people who were

saved, some at the last minute." Spencer Hsu of the Washington Post, notes that "Mississippi's

Supreme Court stayed the execution of Willie Jerome Manning for a 1992 double homicide

hours before he was set to die." It is obvious that mistakes are made within prosecutions. If

innocent people are commonly acquitted from prison and death row due to the varying reasons—

misidentification, misinterpretation, etc.— credulity to trust that innocent citizens have not yet

been wrongfully executed is strained (Buffalo News). A case may be apparently proven, but

truthfully, mistakes can be made from all aspects, whether it is from the memory of an eye

witness or the malfunction of laboratory equipment (Bloodsworth); the death penalty is only yet

another way to falsely condemn an innocent figure.

Ultimately, the death penalty should be eradicated because an action as extreme as capital

punishment should not be contradicted or questioned by its own executers: the government. The

Chan 4

government holds their own set of policies, claiming that cruel and unusual punishment is wrong

(U.S. Const., am. 8); ironically, it is disputed that the leading method of capital punishment—

lethal injection— is truly that: cruel and unusual. The initial 1972 annulment of the death penalty

was largely due to the government's risk of interfering with its purity, thus it is reason enough to

abolish it yet again. In opposition of capital punishment, George Will of Buffalo News has

already begun losing faith in the government's integrity: "Capital punishment is a government

program, so skepticism is in order." Recently, Ohio's Dennis McGuire took 26 minutes to die by

injection; his final words, fused with the repeated gasping for air, were "I feel my whole body

burning" (Bloodsworth). Cruel is inflicting pain and suffering ("Cruel," Merriam-Webster

Online), and it is precisely what was brought upon McGuire as his body slowly reacted to the

toxin spreading throughout his helpless body. Furthermore, if the government were to fulfill the

execution of a mistaken, innocent figure, the action can be seen as an unlawful killing: a murder.

Capital punishment opens up the possibility for unconstitutional acts to be carried out by the

government itself; without its authorization, the government would not be subject to even the

minutest chance of making such mistakes. Fundamentally, it would be beneficial to eliminate

capital punishment as a way to reduce the risk of contradicting the government's own policies

and purity.

Principally, the endorsement of capital punishment should be revoked from all

government policies due to it being unethical, uncertain, and unlawful. The continuation of

capital punishment will not deteriorate the occurrence of crime, but instead, our morality, our

integrity, and our honor as a population. We jeopardize our morality as we choose to employ the

harsher sentence; we jeopardize our integrity, as we hold responsibility for all errors made; we

jeopardize our honor as we, together, experience the loss of yet another man or woman to the

Chan 5

yearning for retribution. It is not only to defend the purity of our government, but the purity of us

—the people— that capital punishment be eliminated.

Chan 6

Works Cited

Bloodsworth, Kirk. "My Case Shows the Need to Abolish the Death Penalty." McClatchy -

Tribune News Service. 05 Jul. 2013: N.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 06 May. 2014.

Dobbs, Greg. "State Inmates Convicted of Murder Deserve Their Fates." Denver Post. 17 Mar.

2013: D.4. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 06 May. 2014.

"End Capital Punishment." Buffalo News. 01 Feb. 2014: A.6. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 06

May. 2014.

Hsu, Spencer S. "At Least 27 Death Penalty Convictions May Be Faulty." Washington Post. 18

Jul. 2013: A.1. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 06 May. 2014.

Kay, Jonathan. "The Ashes of the Dead." National Post. 01 Feb. 2014: A.18. SIRS Issues

Researcher. Web. 06 May. 2014.

Merriam-Webster. Merriam-Webster. Web. 18 May 2014.