For many years there has been a controversy surrounding the legitimacy and ethics of the death penalty in the United States. In recent years our society has become less consumed with the concept of execution for prisoners of the justice system. There is still advocacy for lethal injection from those who believe it is justified and ethical, while in this day and age opposition for the death penalty has reached an unprecedented high. The justification for opposition stems from the thought that it is cruel and unusual punishment as well as unconstitutional. The issue is regularly viewed in black and white hue. It is either supported wholeheartedly or completely denounced. With declining support and inconsistency in the regulation of executions, the death penalty should be abolished because it is cruel and unusual and does not support a person’s natural rights.

The history of the death penalty can be traced back thousands of years to Eighteenth-Century B.C. in the Code of King Hammaurabi of Babylon, which codified the death penalty for 25 different crimes (Randa 1997). Fast forward to the birth of America and we see the introduction of the death penalty into American society. Stated in “A History and Discussion of the Death Penalty,”

Britain influenced America's use of the death penalty more than any other country. When European settlers came to the new world, they brought the practice of capital punishment. The first recorded execution in the new colonies was that of Captain George Kendall in the Jamestown colony of Virginia in 1608. Kendall was executed for being a spy for Spain. In 1612, Virginia Governor Sir Thomas Dale enacted the Divine, Moral and Martial Laws, which provided the death penalty for even minor offenses such as stealing grapes, killing chickens, and trading with Indians. Laws regarding the death penalty varied from colony to colony. The Massachusetts Bay Colony held its first execution in 1630, even though the Capital Laws of New England did not go into effect until years later. The New York Colony instituted the Duke's Laws of 1665. Under these laws, offenses such as striking one's mother or father, or denying the "true God," were punishable by death (Randa, 1997).

As abolition of the death penalty made its way across Europe, American intellectuals also took notice (DPIC).  The first attempted reforms of the death penalty in the U.S. occurred when Thomas Jefferson introduced a bill to revise Virginia's death penalty laws (DPIC). The bill proposed that capital punishment be used only for the crimes of murder and treason (DPIC). It was defeated by only one vote. Over the span of the nineteenth century the Abolitionist movement gained momentum until the 1920s. This was due, in part, to the writings of criminologists, who argued that the death penalty was a necessary social measure (DPIC). The United States was suffering through the Great Depression and Prohibition, and crime was at an all-time high. There were more executions in the 1930s than in any other decade in American history, an average of 167 per year (DPIC). Since the 1930s, “crime levels have always fluctuated between severity and lenity” (Stuntz). This can be the explanation for the faulty criminal justice system in which the death penalty is very controversial. People questioned the boundaries of a law when they believed that their rights weren’t being fulfilled. When that became difficult to control, there were too many ways the government let you be lenient with a law instead of having a clear definition of how a law is considered broken. 

The 50’s brought a public distaste for capital punishment and the rate of execution began to decline. Throughout the 60s the fundamental legality of the death penalty was challenged. It was suggested that the death penalty was “cruel and unusual” punishment and therefore unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment (DPIC). The Supreme Court only “fine-tuned” the way the death penalty was administered instead of abolishing it all together. In the late 70s, the government was more focused on “avoiding criminal punishment, not to impose it” (Stuntz). They believed that avoiding severe criminal punishment had a greater influence than punishing excessively or unnecessarily. Although there were many strategies to try to decrease crime in our society, citizens’ views constantly changed over the years. With constantly changing viewpoints the morals of the population also shifted. People start to challenge ideas and they became more aware of their self-dignity and rights provided as a citizen in the United States. A series of cases known as the Furman vs Georgia cases fought the state of Georgia against the use of the death penalty and won, ultimately suspending the death penalty for 15 years until the adoption of the lethal injection. Charles Brooks then became the first person executed by lethal injection in Texas on December 7, 1982 (DPIC). 

The lethal injection became the standard for execution in the justice system. The United States has a three-drug protocol which uses "an anesthetic or sedative" (DPIC). The three drugs used are "Sodium Thiopental (a drug to induce anesthesia), Pancuronium Bromide (a muscle relaxant that paralyzes all the muscles of the body) and Potassium Chloride (a salt that speeds the heart until it stops)" (Greenemeier). The medical ethics of the death penalty often misalign with the court-mandated physicians who oversee executions by lethal injection. Many physicians believe the death penalty is not ethical and often refuse to oversee executions (Medical Ethics of the Death Penalty). On February 21, 2006 the convicted killer and rapist Michael Morales was scheduled to die by lethal injection just after midnight at California's San Quentin prison. The execution was delayed when two court-appointed anesthesiologists refused to take part. Those doctors had been asked to attend the execution after Morales's legal team called California's lethal injection cocktail cruel and unusual punishment (Medical Ethics of the Death Penalty). The anesthesiologists refused to attend the execution because it went against their fundamental ethical perception of medicine which is to “do no harm” (Medical Ethics of the Death Penalty). Even with the refusal of the court-mandated anesthesiologists to attend the execution, the execution would proceed. The State of California said they had a backup plan in place. If they couldn’t get an anesthesiologist by 7:30pm later that day, when the execution was set, they would use barbiturates rather than this mix of chemicals that are administered intravenously (Medical Ethics of the Death Penalty). This brought more attention to the regulation of the death penalty across the United States. Each state had the choice of the way they execute prisoners and were not regulated by the federal government. 

Many believe that the death penalty violates the 8th amendment of cruel and unusual punishment for criminals.  Those against the death penalty have made the point that lifetime imprisonment is more effective and a worse punishment than letting criminals take the easier way out. Keeping a criminal imprisoned is much more humane than execution. There is also an argument that criminals who receive the death penalty aren’t being given the right to life. In Ethics and Criminal Justice, Klenig believes that just because a criminal might have committed murder it doesn’t mean that they should have a less dignified life. How is it justified to kill someone at citizens’ own expense when keeping them in jail makes the criminal pay for their crimes? Those who are also against the death penalty believe that there should be more of an effort to decrease the amount of crime. There should also be more of an effort to focus on one’s psychological standings. People who support the death penalty are more supporting of the fact that officials should put people in places where they are able to get the necessary help they need instead of putting them down for being incapable of socialization. “Change suggests that criminal punishment is based more on deviance in a society and a political fad rather than the moral quality of the defendant’s conduct” (Stuntz). Most criminals are emotionally and physically detached from their society making them more susceptible to whatever may get them to feel more accepted in their community whether that be positive or negative. This either can drive them to anomic suicide which is suicide that was driven by social standings or the committing of a crime. 

Those who defend the death penalty have many different reasons to support their point of view. The arguments range from it being a deterrence of crime to “a life for a life” in the case of murder charges. There is no credible statistical evidence that capital punishment reduces the rate of homicide. Last year roughly 14,000 murders were committed but only 35 executions took place (ProCon). Since murderers typically expose themselves to far greater immediate risks, the likelihood is incredibly remote that some small chance of execution many years after committing a crime will influence the behavior of a sociopathic deviant who would otherwise be willing to kill if his only penalty were life imprisonment (ProCon). Any criminal who actually thought he would be caught would find the prospect of life without parole to be a monumental penalty. Any criminal who didn’t think he would be caught would be untroubled by any sanction (ProCon). Although there is no clear definition of morality, people who defend the death penalty think it is moral to kill others in self-defense and for the safety of others. The death penalty is a way to eliminate the threat of others who are considerably damaging to our society. Also in defense of keeping the death penalty, the death penalty is an easier load on taxpayers. Keeping a criminal in jail for life imprisonment can be considered more expensive since taxpayers are paying for the funds of the jail. The death penalty is considered "a more predictable consequence instead of induced guilty pleas and harsher sentences” (Stuntz). It also contributes to the governments’ ever-growing problem of overcrowding in jails today. When we overcrowd the inmates, it can cause for a more hostile environment for them. They are forced to live in crowded conditions which may trigger negative effects of their psychological state (Portland State).

Although the death penalty is still considered constitutional by the Supreme Court, Americans’ appetite for this barbaric practice diminishes with each passing year (The Death Penalty, Nearing Its End). For the first time in nearly fifty years, less than half of Americans said they support the death penalty. Executions and new death sentences are at a historic low and decrease each year (The Death Penalty, Nearing Its End). Seven states have abandoned the practice entirely since 2004, for a total of 19 states that no longer have the death penalty (The Death Penalty Endgame). In 2015 only 49 new death sentences were given (The Death Penalty, Nearing Its End). This is the lowest total for one year since the Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment (The Death Penalty, Nearing Its End). If this trend continues it will not be long before the death penalty becomes an obsolete and barbaric form of punishment. 
