
Currently there are about 2,943 people on death row (deathpenaltyinfo.org). All are there because they have been convicted of murder. Should these people be executed? In this paper, I will argue against these people being executed and for the abolishment of capital punishment all together. This topic is an important issue because it quite literally is a question of life or death. The debate around this topic is complicated. It can involve one's morals, religion, personal experiences and many other factors. I will consider many of these aspects when making my argument. I will claim that for legal and moral reasons life in prison is a more effective punishment for heinous crimes than capital punishment is. While many think of the death penalty as the harsher punishment for committing a crime, it's actually the opposite; similarly, despite popular belief life in prison is also less expensive.

Background

Capital punishment has been a major debate in America over the years, especially recently. Currently 31 states, the US Government and US Military have the death penalty-leaving 19 states and the District of Columbia that have banned it (deathpenaltyinfo.org). The issue has been a recent issue of debate due to the recent abolition of capital punishment in a few states and because of the contemporary recent Supreme Court rulings. In 2002 the Supreme Court ruled that executing "mentally retarded" adults is a violation of the Eighth Amendment. In 2005 they also ruled it was unconstitutional to execute children under the age of 18. The most recent state bans were in Maryland in 2013 and in Nebraska in 2015 (Death Penalty Information Center). Nebraska was seen as huge accomplishment because it is considered a conservative state. Even despite the governor of Nebraska vetoing the ban on capital punishment, the state legislators still overrode to the veto to enact the ban. It is also important to note public opinion on the issue. As of October 2015, 61% of Americans are in favor of the death penalty, 37% are not in favor and 2% had no opinion. This compares to 2014 where 63% were in favor, 33% not in favor and 4% had no opinion (Gallup). Perhaps this rise in disapproval of the death penalty can be attributed to the recent stories of botched executions and false sentences. These stories caused a lot of controversy and made people very upset. Stories like these generate a lot of publicity and hence can impact public opinion.

Life in Prison is a Harsher Sentence

Life in prison is physically and psychologically harsh; those sentenced to life in prison for the most heinous crimes truly must suffer the consequences for their actions. Most Americans believe that we need to be tough on crime and life in prison is just that. Prisoners are forced to give up many of their freedoms and live a life with no hope of parole. Many Americans might recognize the name Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was one of the Boston Marathon bombers who killed three innocent people and severely injured many more. People like him do not get off easy in prison. In fact, he has been in solitary confinement for at least a year and a half. He is also under "special administrative measures" also known as SAMs (Gessen). These measures contribute to what makes life in prison a harsher sentence than the death penalty. "According to a Human Rights Watch report, inmates under SAMs are usually fully isolated from other prisoners. Solitary confinement usually means spending 23 hours a day alone in a cell; SAMs often means that this cell is in a special block from which the inmate can never see or hear other prisoners, even by knocking on a wall or peering through a window" (Gessen). These are the consequences one must face when they take the lives of innocent people. They still must live in order to truly suffer for what they have done. Another important reason why life in prison is the better sentence is that there are many convicted murderers who would prefer to be executed. This demonstrates that prisoners do not want to suffer through life in prison. Therefore, we should not give those who have committed the most heinous crimes the easy way out. One prisoner sentenced to life said in an interview, "I hate this place with a passion. I cannot stand it. Sometimes I wake up and start looking around me and then I just lay there with my eyes closed because I just don't want to look at it. I don't want to see the concrete. I don't want to remember that I'm here" (Johnson). This first-hand account demonstrates that life in prison is not easy and those who commit capital crimes must live with the consequences. If this inmate had been executed, he wouldn't have to suffer for what he had done. For this reason, there are many convicted murderers that would prefer to be executed. Another example is Joseph Parsons, a Utah prisoner that killed a man and consequently was sentenced to death. Right before his execution he stated, "I'm looking forward to this. The situation I'm in now is horrible. To me, I can't think of anything worse than this ... to me, in my situation that I am in right now, this is the worst it could possibly be so it's a relief to know that I'm not going to be here no more ... the next journey has got to be better than this one" (Johnson). This quote is very troubling because essentially a man who murdered an innocent human being is looking forward to his punishment. By allowing him to be executed it is also allowing him to no longer have to live with what he has done. Capital punishment is the easy way out in contrast, life in prison forces the inmate to pay for the lives they have robbed of others. 

Capital punishment is more expensive than life in prison

Despite common belief, capital punishment is significantly more expensive than life in prison and causes several negative impacts on the criminal justice system. It might sound surprising but those states that have the death penalty spend absurd amounts of extra money because of it. The main reason behind this is because of numerous appeals and special procedures associated with the death penalty. For example, "Since reinstating its death penalty in 1978, California has conducted nearly 2,000 capital trials and has executed 13 people. Over those 33 years, the death penalty system cost the state $4.6 billion. Divided up, that equates to $308 million per execution" (Delcour). This amount of money is illogical, especially for a system that is already under ridicule for several other factors. It is also significant to point out that the state of California is in a tough financial situation. To me, the state is essentially wasting significant amounts of money on seeking executions instead of life in prison. This is not just an issue in California. "A North Carolina study also performed a cost-benefit analysis and found a $2 million difference between a death sentence and a life-without-parole sentence. In Texas, a death penalty case costs about $3 million, three times the cost of imprisoning an inmate for 40 years. In Maryland, a death penalty case costs about three times more than a case in which the prosecutor does not seek the death penalty, according to an Urban Institute study" (Delcour). It is important for people in those states that still have the death penalty to understand how costly the system is, especially because most people do not realize it is more expensive than a sentence of life in prison. The amount of extra money that these states are spending is substantial. Perhaps the money could be put to other uses as well, such as law enforcement. Millions of dollars towards law enforcement could make a big impact. Improved law enforcement could help stop the problem before it even occurs and then subsequently decrease the amount of murder cases. Also, the cost of the death penalty has been and still is increasing. For example, in Florida a study done found that the cost per execution was about $3.2 million. More recent studies project the cost at $24 million, just for one individual (Death Penalty Information Center). Often many capital punishment cases don't even end with an execution. Clearly seeking a death sentence is more expensive even if it doesn't end with an execution. It is also common for those who are given death sentences to eventually appeal and end up with life in prison (Bedau). Therefore, there is a lot of money wasted seeking executions that will rarely happen. Capital punishment is not just costly in terms of money but also costly in terms of time. Capital punishment cases involve a lot more deliberation and appeals, which take up a great deal of time. For example, "If it takes 1,000 hours of state-salaried work to arrive at a death sentence and only 100 hours to have the same person sentenced to life without parole, the 900 hours' difference is a state asset" (Delcour). Without the death penalty this extra amount of time could be put to better use. Public defenders and others employed by the state that spend time working on death penalty cases could potentially put more time into cold cases. The increased time spent on capital punishment cases also clogs the court system. The longer duration of cases and additional appeals have a big impact on making the courts busier. Without the death penalty, courts would not have to deal with as many cases and could run more smoothly. The wasted amount of time and money on capital punishment is reason alone that states should seriously consider abolishing it. 

Counterargument: Capital Punishment is a Deterrent 

One of the main arguments for those who support the death penalty is that it is a deterrent of crime. They argue that because death is a risk criminals are less likely to commit crimes that could be punishable by death. Although this may seem reasonable, in reality it is not. Studies have shown that capital punishment does not affect a criminal's behavior. Specifically supporters may argue that in cases such as if a criminal were robbing someone they would more likely kill the person if there were no death penalty because there is not much difference between the penalties of murder and stealing. However, Dr. Jonathan Groner, a professor at Ohio State University College of Medicine and Public Health, who researches the deterrent effect of the death penalty stated, "It is very clear that deterrents are not effective in the area of capital punishment," as well as," The psychological mind-set of the criminal is such that they are not able to consider consequences at the time of the crime. Most crimes are crimes of passion that are done in situations involving intense excitement or concern. People who commit these crimes are not in a normal state of mind -- they do not consider the consequences in a logical way" (Williams). This expert opinion refutes the claims of many people who support the death penalty. Despite what they think as Groner points out criminals are not in the state of mind to be considering if the US state that they reside in has the death penalty or not. Also, from a broader prospective, studies have shown that there is no evidence of a correlation of having capital punishment and a lower murder rate. This can be demonstrated by a study done comparing Singapore and Hong Kong. The death penalty in Hong Kong has been abolished since 1993, while in Singapore it is the mandatory sentence for murder. Also, the two cities are very similar in all other aspects which make them good for comparison. Therefore, Jeffery Fagan of Columbia's Law School and two collaborators did a study on the cities' murder rates. From their study they found that these cities' murder rates are very similar despite opposite stances on capital punishment (Ehrenfreund). There have also been similar studies done in America comparing those states with the death penalty to those without. These studies have yielded similar results. For example, a study done by professors from University of Pennsylvania and Yale did not show a correlation between homicide rates and the death penalty. They did a comparison from 1960 to 2000 specifically to show the four-year moratorium from 1972 to 1976 based off the Supreme Court decision which temporarily banned the death penalty. As the study says, "Both sets of states experienced higher homicide rates during the death penalty moratorium than over the subsequent decade; the gap widened for the subsequent decade and narrowed only in the late 1990s. It is very difficult to find evidence of deterrence in these Supreme Court-mandated natural experiments that the death penalty has any causal effects at all on the homicide rate. Clearly, most of the action in homicide rates in the United States is unrelated to capital punishment" (Donohue). This study is particularly interesting and relevant because it is based off of America. It compares data from over 40 years, which allows for an accurate conclusion to be made. It is also interesting to notice that homicide rates peak and drop at the same times regardless of the status of capital punishment. As the study said this demonstrates there are factors other than capital punishment that have a much stronger affect on homicide rates (Donohue). Hence it is wrong to make the argument that the death penalty deters murders.  

Morality: The Risk of Innocent Lives

A major issue with the death penalty is that there is no coming back. Death is permanent, and mistakes do happen in the criminal justice system. Life in prison does not put a time limit on the amount of time for new evidence to be presented and hence gives the opportunity for wrongfully convicted people to be proven innocent. Capital punishment presents too much of a risk of executing people who are innocent as well as those who did not receive a fair trial. This has become a much more significant issue recently. New technology has continuously been able to prove more people innocent. DNA technology is becoming more advanced and readily available proving that mistakes have been made (Drehle). Radley Balko, a senior editor at Reason magazine, wrote an article concerning this issue. In it he says, "Freddie Peacock of Rochester, New York, was convicted of rape in 1976. Last week [in February 2010] he became the 250th person to be exonerated by DNA testing since 1989. According to a new report by the Innocence Project, those 250 prisoners served 3,160 years between them; 17 spent time on death row. Remarkably, 67 percent of them were convicted after 2000 -- a decade after the onset of modern DNA testing. The glaring question here is; how many more are there?" (Balko). Innocent people being sentenced for things they didn't do is a real problem. Most people are aware that it may happen but regard it as very rare. Although it is not common it is not rare either. Even if it was rare, one person should not be put to death for something they did not do. Clearly there is a problem with the criminal justice system. In fact, it may be an even bigger problem than previously realized. A new study found that there could be, "approximately 120 of the roughly 3,000 inmates on death row in America, might not be guilty, while additional scores of wrongfully convicted inmates are serving life in prison after their death sentences were reduced over technical legal errors" (Drehle). These numbers are very alarming and especially concerning due to the death penalty. Those innocent people on death row may be executed before ever given the chance to be proven innocent. However, if capital punishment was abolished those innocent people would have much more time to appeal their conviction and be exonerated. 

Capital Punishment is Unconstitutional

Capital punishment also goes against the "cruel and unusual punishment" clause of the 8th amendment therefore making it unconstitutional. The clause states, "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" (Forte). Taking someone's life is both cruel and unusual. That is why it is regarded as one of the most heinous crimes. The death penalty is especially cruel when the person must suffer extreme amounts of physical pain. This is exactly what has been occurring recently. States are administering unreliable drugs that are not working like they are intended to do. Many states are using a three-drug cocktail as their execution method (Kendall). According to George Kendall, an attorney and a board member of the Death Penalty information center, "The first drug is supposed to be the anesthetic that knocks the prisoner out; the second is a paralytic that prevents all movement; the third causes searing pain and stops the heart" (Kendall). Therefore, if the first drug does not work the inmate will suffer tremendously. This has become a major issue because states have been having a difficult time obtaining the correct anesthetics. This has lead states to use a controversial drug, midazolam, and it has failed to work several times (Kendall). Kendall also wrote that, "In an Ohio case, the inmate could be heard gasping and snorting for over 20 minutes after receiving it. In an Arizona case, the inmate gasped for nearly two hours before being pronounced dead. And in Oklahoma, condemned inmate Clayton Lockett awoke during the execution process after receiving a large dose of midazolam and suffered greatly before his death" (Kendall). These people have clearly suffered a great deal. If the death penalty continues there will be more inmates that will have to suffer as well. Although some may believe those convicted of murder should have to suffer physical pain, it is against our constitution. The constitution is the supreme law and thus the United States of America must abide by it. Recently the Supreme Court heard the case Glossip v. Gross. This case brought up that the use of midazolam as a sedative violated the 8th amendment because it failed to prevent the inmate from physical suffering. Unfortunately, the case did not rule in Glossip's favor but Justice Sotomayor wrote an interesting dissent. In it she brought up that it is time to reconsider if capital punishment violates the Eighth Amendment in all cases. She is not the first Supreme Court justice to have doubts over the death penalty. In fact, as Kendall stated,"  ... Lewis Powell told his biographer that the death penalty should be abolished. Another Nixon appointee, Harry Blackmun, wrote in 1994 that he would no longer 'tinker with the machinery of death.' And in 2008, John Paul Stevens wrote that his review of hundreds of cases has persuaded him that the penalty is profoundly unworkable and unconstitutional" (Kendall). These opinions from such highly regarded figures are tremendously important. Supreme Court justices are highly intelligent and experts on the Constitution. Therefore, when several justices, past and present, agree that something is unconstitutional and it is still legal, there is an issue. Many states have recognized the issue and hence abolished the death penalty, but there are still many more that have not.

Life in prison is less expensive than the death penalty, is more constitutional and and prevents the risk of executing an innocent person. It is also a more effective punishment, and despite popular belief, capital punishment does not deter crime. By replacing the death penalty with life in prison there would be several significant benefits. Perhaps this is why almost all other developed nations have already abolished the punishment. 19 states have already also done so, but it is time for the rest to follow. To do so, I believe it is important for the public to become better educated on the topic. There are a lot common misconceptions that benefit arguments for capital punishment. Perhaps if people were more aware of how much more expensive capital punishment is and that some criminals preferred it, public sentiment would change. Or maybe, if the public knew about the number of faulty convictions and botched executions, opinions would change. I believe if more people were educated on the issue there would be less states that would still allow the death penalty. It is time for people to become aware of the facts surrounding this topic. With public support more states will start passing legislation to abolish capital punishment and replace it with life in prison without parole.

