The Death Penalty

Few things are better, on a Sunday morning, to sit in front of my computer with a hot cup of coffee and not go to church. I always hated the wretched affair. Getting up early on the weekend, half of my two precious days off from school. Having to put on nice clothes—I still hate putting on damned ties. Sitting uncomfortably on hard pews and singing boring songs and listening to unimaginative sermons. Milling about afterwards while my mom uses the restroom, and then off to some lunch out feeling like I’ve wasted hours of my life.

Now I have the luxury of never going to church again. You can’t make me!

Let’s talk about the death penalty. I’ve been meaning to talk about it for years, but haven’t ever quite gotten around to it. I’m currently against it. Here’s why.

Hypocrisy. Generally, the only reason why people push out the death penalty is to punish murderers. Sure, some could argue for the death penalty for lesser offenses, like treason, and so forth, but for the vast majority, it’s to punish murderers. I think it’s hypocritical to punish someone with death for causing death. Granted, the death penalty isn’t murder by definition, but doesn’t it accomplish the same thing? If someone kills, aren’t we saying that killing is bad? Why then do we have the right to kill back, given other options?

I can imagine that in the past, or in certain circumstances, people didn’t have the option of permanently imprisoning murderers. A small island with five people on it, for instance, with a caught murderer—how on earth could the island’s inhabitants keep watch on the murderer and carry out their busy lives? Hang the murderer and get on with your lives.

Nowadays in modern society, especially in America, prisons are everywhere and well-equipped to permanently house those who could harm us. Society is not in danger by caught murderers. They’re not going to escape and rampage villages. So it’s no longer necessary to ‘get rid’ of the danger anymore.

Vigilantism. Common arguments for the death penalty truck out the argument, What if someone killed your beloved family member? Wouldn’t you want to see them die? I think this line of thinking is a mistake. To make this argument makes an argument for vigilantism. I do not think justice to be in the hands of the irrational. If someone killed my beloved family member, I’m precisely the wrong person to ask how to achieve justice, because I’ve lost my impartiality and, no doubt, rationality. It’s precisely at this moment that I’m the wrong person to ask how to achieve justice, because all I’d want to do is strike out and kill, kill, kill in a rage. It’s understandable, but it’s not rational. Let the police, the judges, the juries find justice; not the victims of collateral damage.

Cruel and Unusual. The eighth amendment of the U.S. Constitution states:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

I think capital punishment is cruel. How could it not be? By killing someone for punishment, no matter how humanely, the person results without one of their basic human rights, the right to life. How can killing someone not be cruel in a base way, especially when alternatives are an option? Also, given the current appeals process, I would also say the lengthy road to the end result is cruel. Capital punishment is certainly unusual, given that the vast majority of murderers out there are not put to death.

Certainty. Given the fallibility of any human construction, there is always the probability that the convicted subject is innocent. Capital punishment leaves no recourse, and if the condemned is later found innocent ex post facto, there is nothing but apologies and name-clearing to do. By enacting the death penalty, you have to admit that you are willing to kill an innocent person, however slight the possibility.

Pragmatics. I’ve heard statistics quoted at me of the expense of putting someone on death row in the United States. I’ve always found this to be a weak argument against the death penalty, but I thought I’d mention it anyway. They say it’s more expensive to put someone to death than to permanently imprison them.

No prevention. There also seems little evidence stating that the death penalty is a deterrence measure. Murderers seem indifferent to commit crimes in states with or without the death penalty.

So those who promote the use of capital punishment must do so on the moral grounds of the righteousness of the punishment itself. Can killing someone in retaliation be moral in a rational society? Given other options, I can’t think how it could be.