 The controversy on using the death penalty as a form of punishment has been around since the first forms of punishment, and continues to be argued throughout society today. One of the most controversial issues concerning whether the death penalty should be legal or not, is if it should be considered a cruel and unusual punishment. There are many who have strong opinions about the death penalty due to their political stance and religious views however, there are many different factors when discussing if it should be considered inhumane. Our court systems were established to recognize the amendments of the constitution and abide by what they say. When the death penalty is on the table as a possible punishment for a criminal people often refer to the eighth amendment. The eighth amendment states "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." This amendment offers a solution to this ongoing debate and is it that the death penalty should be ruled cruel and unusual punishment because it is irreversible, immoral, and can be economically and racially biased.

Many supporters of the death penalty argue that lethal injection which is the method most commonly used is painless, and allows capital punishment to be fair because they are often dying a less painful death than their victim. This often perceived painless injection is not always the case though because, there are many executions that have been botched. An example is the Arizona killer who took two hours to die from lethal injection. "The execution became so prolonged that reporters witnessing the execution counted several hundred of his wheezes before he was finally declared dead at 3:49 p.m." (Pearce).  Prior to his execution Wood had fought without success to receive more information on the drugs and the people in charge of his execution however, it was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court. Pearce included this fact because it shows that the government will not even let the criminals know for sure that the drugs and executioners being used are reliable, and that using lethal injection is not always quick and painless.

There has been a trend globally to abolish capital punishment. "In 1986, 46 countries had abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes. Sixteen years later, the number of countries in the same category had almost doubled to 89 Moreover, another 22 countries had stopped using the death penalty in practice, bringing the total of non-death penalty countries to 111, far more than the 84 countries which retain an active death penalty" (Dieter).  Countries have decided to abolish the death penalty for a number of reasons which may include a broader understanding of human rights but, the U.S. is falling into the minority when it comes to the death penalty debate and our stance on the issue globally.

The United State's decision on capital punishment also allows other countries to form opinions of the U.S. and how they think of our country as a whole. "Spain abandoned the last vestiges of its death penalty in 1995, stating that: "the death penalty has no place in the general penal system of advanced, civilized societies . . . . What more degrading or afflictive punishment can be imagined than to deprive a person of his life . . . ?" (Dieter). Spain obviously thinks that the death penalty has no place in an advanced and civilized society, so if we support the use of capital punishment it allows other countries to look at us with that same opinion. Dieter also states that Switzerland abolished the death penalty because it constituted a flagrant violation of the right to life and dignity. Both of these countries being used as examples are abolishing capital punishment because they consider it inhumane, and that is exactly why it should also be abolished in the United States.

A common argument made by supporters of the death penalty is that it makes it easier on the victim's families because the death penalty honors the victim. It may assure the family that the criminal is gone and will never commit a crime again however, the court process in so lengthy that is leaves the family entangled in the case for years. "Death penalty cases on average take 25 years or so to reach ultimate resolution, whether it be the imposition of the death sentence, a reversal or otherwise." (Holloway). The lengthy time span that involves capital punishment cases is another issue in itself because an inmate can be sitting on death row for an extensive time, which is also costly to tax payers. An example is the court case involving James Holmes that killed 12 in a movie theater in July 2012. When his cases had the death penalty brought to the table "the trial portion of the process alone is six times longer then if the state were seeking life without parole." (Holloway).

Throughout the history of the death penalty in the U.S. states have reviewed and revised execution methods in hope of finding a more humane option. In Grinberg's article she states that the most common method of execution in the 19th century was hanging until, New York led the charge in the 1880's to trade the hangman's noose for the electric chair. After this many states all began to determine the most humane way to carry out an execution such as Nevada in 1921 with lethal gas. Although, "some states still kept the firing squad and hanging, electrocution remained the predominate method of state execution for much of the 20th century." (Grinberg). Currently the methods that are still legal in certain parts of the U.S. are lethal injection, electrocution, gas chamber, hanging, and firing squad (Death Penalty Information Center).

Grinberg quotes Robert Dunham who is the director of the death penalty information center "Every time someone introduces a new method of execution, they make the same argument: 'Trust me. It will be quick. It will be painless. It is the most humane alternative," Dunham then goes on to say that many have a political or commercial interest in the outcome but, they haven't done any real medical or scientific research to back up their claims and in every instance sooner or later, something they didn't anticipate goes wrong. The most current form is lethal injection and is "particularly problematic because it relies on medical technology and knowledge -- syringes, IV poles lines, finding usable veins -- even though it's not a medical procedure" (Grinberg). It is not a medical procedure so this allows each state to come up with its own protocol without a set of standardized guidelines developed by medical professionals, and this is what causes so many botched executions.

An execution that really inspired the eighth amendment argument is Lockett's execution that turned out to be a "procedural disaster". "A review of the execution determined that the team, which included a doctor and paramedic, failed to properly establish intravenous access to Lockett's cardiovascular system, causing the IV fluid to leak into tissue rather then enter his bloodstream" (Grinberg). After this the team declared him as unconscious and began the lethal injection process but shortly after witnesses reported Lockett cursing and moaning that the drugs weren't working and he died 43 minutes later. Lockett was convicted of murder, rape, kidnapping, and burglary in 2000. Robinson who is an opinion writer for The Washington Post stated "When I read about what Lockett did, I want to strangle him with my own hands. But revenge is not the same thing as justice, and karmic retribution is not a power I trust government to exercise. The death penalty has no place in a civilized society" (Haugh). This adds to the argument that revenge is not justice and that as a society we should not give the government the power to take a citizen's life.

Something often brought up when discussing capital punishment is whether the death penalty deters crimes in a community when it is an option of punishment. Many believe that if the "criminals are aware they could be executed they will not commit these crimes so in short, capital punishment does, in fact save lives" (Muhlhausen) based off of statistics from certain states. Since the Supreme Court began to re-allow executions in 1976, about 14,000 people have been executed but, never over 100 in a given year which is too small a sample from which to draw definite proof. "However, the murder rate per 100,000 residents in the non-death-penalty states has been consistently lower than the rate in states with executions." (Gillespie). This due to the majority of murders are not planned crimes but, are often fueled by drugs, booze, and mental illness. Gillespie explains this by saying "The threat of execution at some future date is unlikely to enter the minds of those acting under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol, those who are in the grip of fear or rage, those who are panicking while committing another crime (such as a robbery), or those who suffer from mental illness or mental retardation and do not fully understand the gravity of their crime." Therefore, capital punishment is not proven to deter crimes because often that is not something that even goes through the criminal's mind when committing it. 

The death penalty also fails to recognize that guilty people do have the ability to turn around and change. This denies the criminal the opportunity to ever rejoin society even though they may be able to benefit the community around them. The death penalty says that some people do not deserve and second change and are beyond redemption. The Campaign to End the Death Penalty states "many people on death row never got any first chances. Poverty, racism, neglect, violence and mental illness are all issues impacting who becomes a criminal." An example Campaign to End Death Penalty uses is Stan Tookie Williams, who was a former leader of the gang Crips in Los Angles who was sentenced to death. While on death row renounced his past and wrote a series of anti-gang books geared towards youth. Teachers even contacted Williams to address students in their classroom via telephone on how students should stay away from gangs. The Campaign also stated that "The youth who listened to him were captivated by his words. His work to curb gang violence was probably more effective than any legislative action our "leaders" have taken." Yet instead of supporting Williams and the good he was doing in the community he was still executed in 2005.

There are also many arguments made that there is a racial bias when concerning the death penalty. If the ruling in court systems need to be fair and not cruel or unusual the rulings should be unbiased especially when someone's life is at stake.  "One effect that racism has is that white murderers are less likely to be given the death penalty. Thus, murderers belonging to a racial minority are disproportionately sentenced to death." (Stichter). He also points out that if the crime is committed against a white person they are more inclined to receive a harsher punishment. If the rulings are unjust and biased it is going to be cruel and unusual to the criminal actually sentenced to death row. 

A common statement often heard is two wrongs do not make a right. This is a statement also learned in elementary school when someone does something mean to you such as stick out their tongue on their playground and you did it back you'll also get the same punishment. If you complain to a teacher her reasoning may be well just because someone did it to you does not give you the right to do it to someone else. The crimes committed concerning a death penalty case are obviously a bit more extreme and deserve punishment but, what are we teaching people by teaching that two wrongs make a right? "It is important to set an example for criminals, but by enforcing the death penalty, society is being hypocritical and implicitly accepting their violent motives." (Stevenson). He goes on to elaborate that instead, we must show that human life is sacred and should not be destroyed by government policy. 

It is often hard to imagine that with all the lengthy processes and all of the precautions taken that someone innocent could end up on death row but, the fact is, this is a possibility and has happened in our past. "A new analysis is adding a level of much-needed detail, and it concludes that more than twice as many inmates were wrongly convicted and sentenced to death than have been exonerated and freed." (Maron). This is because once someone is executed on death row the verdict has reached a point of no return and can not be reversed. A study included in Maron's article is led by a team of statisticians and lawyers examined data on 7,482 defendants who were given death sentences between 1973 and 2004 and death exonerations during this time. After conducting the study, it was found that there was a 4.1 percent rate of false conviction. Due to the fact that an innocent person can end up on death row shows how cruel and unusual using this form of punishment can be because, nothing is fair about sentencing an innocent person to die. 

Capital punishment seems like an issue to most citizens that do not effect them, so they may have their opinion on the issue but not act on it. The death penalty obviously effects the criminals being sentenced to death however, it also branches out too many others. It affects the lawyers and law makers within a state and politicians who have to take a public stance on the issue. It entangles the victim's and criminal's family throughout the lengthy process and forces them to be involved in lengthy trials they may not be wanting to focus on. It also branches beyond that to the average tax payer. Many argue that they do not want to continue to pay money to a violent criminal living in jail however, it is proven that the death penalty is much more expensive compared to a court case that just includes life without parole. "When the death penalty is in play, "the legal costs [per case] skyrocket to an extra $134 million per year, well above the cost to implement life without possibility of parole." (Gillespie). So considering all the flaws within the system is it really worth spending all this extra money when a criminal may be innocent?

Capital punishment is an issue in our society that has been argued about throughout history. People are for and against this issue for many different reasons but, something that could end the debate is to rule the death penalty as cruel and unusual punishment so it would not be allowed under the 8th amendment. There are way too many issues when discussing capital punishment and flaws in the system that make it unfair and not right for our country. People will continue to argue this debate for different reasons such as their political or religious beliefs but a way to end this debate is to rule it unconstitutional. If we still have not found a humane way to execute someone, have innocent people on death row, and see other countries looking down at our decision, how can we ever continue to progress as a society?   

  
