Death Penalty: Both Sides of the Fence
The Death Penalty1 (also called capital punishment) has become a highly contentious issue in recent times with seemingly weighty arguments advanced by people on both sides of the fence. Supporters of the death penalty argue that it is an effective deterrent against serious crime, conforms to the principle of retribution for taking of a human life, and prevents murderers from repeating their crimes. Its opponents, on the other hand, claim that life imprisonment is in no way a less effective deterrent, death penalty violates a criminal's "right to life," it may result in executions of some who are wrongfully convicted, and discriminates against minorities and the poor. It is my contention that death penalty should be more frequently in cases of sufficiently serious nature such as premeditated murder so that tax payers' money is not wasted on a criminal who can no longer contribute to society.Although economics can never be the sole or even the major reason for a 'life and death' question such as capital punishment, I make this contention precisely because opponents of death penalty have frequently used the costs involved in enforcing the death penalty as an argument against it. It has been a long-standing argument of the abolition
In addition, constant pressure on the judges and jury members by the anti-death penalty lobbies has resulted in a drastic reduction in the number of executions even for the most heinous murders to such an extent that the cost of executing a single murderer has gone up. Such "studies" fail to mention that there is no real need for such lengthy and repeated appeals in death penalty trials and there is a pressing need to speed up capital case appeals in the US criminal justice system. 21-22) Even if we, for the moment, set aside the question of whether it is more expensive to enforce capital punishment or not, it is morally offensive and contrary to a sense of justice that the tax payers money should be used to support the lives of criminals who have themselves taken the life (or lives) of innocent people. The author, therefore, concludes "that society avoids losing approximately $70 million per year on average at the current rate of execution. Hence, the problem lies in an overly cumbersome appeal process in death penalty trials rather than the concept of the just principle of retribution inherent in the death penalty for dangerous criminals who have committed grievous harm and have the potential for causing further injury to the society. (Sharp, 2006) It is indeed ironic that the anti-death penalty activists first campaign to prolong the appeal process in capital punishment trials; contribute directly in ratcheting up the costs; try their utmost to prevent executions, and then quote the resulting "high" per execution cost as an argument for doing away with the death penalty. An important research study in this regard was conducted by Dr. Moreover, the costs of capital punishment cases have gone up in the United States in recent times just because the constant campaign against capital punishment has prolonged the appeal process in capital punishment to unacceptable levels. Another important economic aspect of death penalties, which is often ignored by the so-called "expert studies" about the supposedly high cost of executions, is the huge cost-benefit to the society provided by the prevention of murders. Paul Zimmerman, an eminent economist at US Federal Trade Commission. is divided by the correct number, i. For instance, only 11 executions in California took place over 27 years up to March 2005, while there were a total of 640 prisoners on death row. ) and estimated that a single state execution deters between 3 and 25 (or approximately fourteen on average) murders per year. The study used state level data from 1978 to 1997 for all 50 states (excluding Washington D. In conclusion, I would like to reiterate my firm belief that the death penalty needs to be enforced more strictly in order to prevent the unjustified expenditure of the tax-payers money on criminals who are not only a burden on, but a dangerous threat for the society.
Common topics in this essay:
Times Study,
Washington DC,
Death Penalty1,
Death Penalty,
death penalty,
Trade Commission,
capital punishment,
Paul Zimmerman,
anti-death penalty,
appeal process,
taxpayers' money,
Kansas Study,
appeal process capital,
death penalty trials,
process capital punishment,
process capital,
penalty activists,
total amount,
effective deterrent,
incurred trial,
anti-death penalty activists,
death penalty frequently,
|
Acceptance Essays
