The U.S. assumes first place globally in many aspects, proving its unique and exclusive nature. However, certain elements are ethically biased, including the number of charged death sentences in the country. In contrast to other developed Western countries, America is the only democracy that does not abolish this penalty, and there are 2,436 death row prisoners in the United States now (Steiker, Steiker 299). Only 18 people were executed last year, which shows a gap between the number of executions and convictions (Steiker, Steiker 299). DS has the support of specific conservative population groups despite it being ineffective in deterrence, cost-ineffective, and racially and subjectively biased (Rancourt et al. 3). Therefore, I argue that current circumstances no longer justify the DS penalty, which, thus, should be abolished from U.S. juridical practice.
Above everything else, punishments serve to remind people of the impending crime’s consequences. The highest measure of punishment should logically be the most efficient overall deterrence. Unfortunately, statistics do not indicate the DS’ desired effect on homicide incidence reduction: according to Amnesty International (2009), murder deterrence invoked by capital punishment does not outweigh the deterrence caused by life imprisonment measures. Moreover, DS administration and the costs associated with capital trials continue to grow steadily (Steiker, Steiker 304). The main reason is that more than two thousand death row prisoners have been waiting for execution for years, which requires money from the budget. According to the estimates, one prisoner requires more than $35,000 annually (Steiker, Steiker 308). It is agreed that a single death penalty still costs the government more than $1,000,000 USD. Despite the cost of lifetime incarceration, DS today does not present a cost-effective decision.
Another issue connected to the DS penalty is racial bias. Rancourt et al. (3) highlight that people favoring capital punishment are politically conservative, primarily white males. In the meantime, the racial-based statistics on exoneration rates showcase that more than half of exonerated inmates are black, with white people representing roughly 36% (From Death Row to Freedom). Indeed, there is nothing wrong with a desire to pursue justice and punish injustice. However, there might be a hint of hypocrisy in calls for justice from the population group, which is less subjected to judicial errors.
Furthermore, some studies indicate judicial subjectivity along with racial bias. According to the example showcased by Ford (2022), the judge issued a death sentence to a murderer, despite the jury voting eight to four for a life sentence instead. The judge argued his decision by blaming the jurors for being tired of the process and consequently accused them without evidence of being “lazy or negligent in their duties” (Ford 2022). Such subjectivity (apart from representing utterly inappropriate behavior) illustrates how simple it is to issue a DS penalty even after facing reasonable alternatives.
Considering the gathered evidence, the DS penalty no longer proves to have a justified cause to remain in judicial practice:
- It does not impact the deterrence rate enough compared to other available means of punishment. It is not a cost-effective measure either.
- A certain degree of racial prejudice is involved in the DS topic.
- The bias might also affect the objectivity of a trial, especially in cases when the judges possess legal means of imposing their decisions.
Therefore, I believe the DS penalty should be ultimately abolished. A criminal can take somebody’s life does not explicitly mean they should give them in return. People do not know what is in the afterlife, and chances are that a criminal will endlessly face the consequences of their sins after death. Therefore, there is no need to execute the criminal by the state. People who do not believe in the afterlife might still consider the death sentence cruel and excessive compared to the suffering of imprisonment.
Works Cited
Amnesty International. “The Death Penalty Should Be Abolished.” Criminal Justice, edited by David Haugen and Susan Musser, Greenhaven Press, 2009. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints.
Ford, Matt. “The Supreme Court Faces a Matter of Life and Death.” Gale Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection, Gale, 2022. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints.
“From Death Row to Freedom: 185 Americans since 1972 Have Avoided Executions Because They’ve Been Shown to Be Innocent.” Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints.
Rancourt, Marc-Antoine, et al. “Is the Death Penalty Debate Really Dead? Contrasting Capital Punishment Support in Canada and the United States.” Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, vol. 20, no. 1, 2020, pp. 536-562.
Steiker, Carol S., and Jordan M. Steiker. “The Rise, Fall, and Afterlife of the Death Penalty in the United States.” Annual Review of Criminology, vol. 3, 2020, pp. 299-315.