The Controversial Nature of Death Penalty
The death penalty is one of the oldest methods of punishment for crimes. There are a few main distinctive features that define the concept of the death penalty. Death penalty is the most severe punishment, depriving a person, whose guilt has been proven in court, from the life and causing suffering to the convict and his family. It is a forced measure, enforceable by the state in the public interest and only by a court.
Death penalty as a sentence is preceded by a long period of trial, and the defendant has the opportunity to challenge the court's decision by submitting an appeal. Often this leads to the fact that a man sentenced to death can wait for its execution for years. This trend is most clearly evident in the U.S., where the convicts are waiting for the final trial and its execution during not less than ten years.
The end of XX and the beginning of XXI century have seriously changed the overall situation with the death penalty in the world. There is a definite trend towards a marked restriction. In 1948, the death penalty was declined only by eight countries in the world. By 1978 there had already been nineteen countries, and the major percentage of rejection of the death penalty falls on 1990. By 2001 109 countries worldwide declined the death penalty as punishment. Amnesty International points out that in 1996 the death penalty was allowed in 41 countries of the world, to date - only 28 of them left (Amnesty International Death Penalty).
The United States is the only country in the Americas, where they still use the death penalty. According to Amnesty International, the U.S. annually is among the five leaders of the countries, in which the majority of executions occur. Also on the list are China, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Iran.
To date, the death penalty in the United States is enacted at the federal level, and is a part of the criminal law in 33 states. The convict can be sentenced to the death penalty for the most serious crimes, such as murder or rape with aggravating circumstances. In total, the federal legislation of the country provided seventy types of crimes that may result in the death penalty.
In 2005, the U.S. Congress on the initiative of the Republican Party has approved a bill, which proposed to expand the list of offenses carrying the death penalty as a punishment. It provides, inter alia, the possibility to sentence a convict to the death penalty or long imprisonment for any crime resulting in death.
The death penalty is currently present in the law in Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming, Delaware, Georgia, Indiana, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada , New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon (moratorium from 2011 to 2015), Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Florida, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah. In addition, the death penalty may be imposed by the federal government and the U.S. military tribunal.
States that do not impose the death penalty: Iowa (since 1965), Alaska (1957), Vermont (1964), Wisconsin (1853), Hawaii (1948), West Virginia (1965), Illinois (2011), Kentucky (2012), Maine (1887), Massachusetts (1984), Michigan (1846), Minnesota (1911), New Jersey (2007), New Mexico (2009), New York (2007), North Dakota (1973), Rhode Island (1984), as well as the metropolitan DC area.
In 2010, 46 death sentences were executed in 10 states - Alabama, Virginia, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Florida and Utah.
In 2011, 43 executions were held in 13 states - Idaho, Alabama, Arizona, Virginia, Delaware, Georgia, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Florida and South Carolina.
As of 2012, 140 countries in the world have abolished the death penalty, in 58 countries capital punishment still exists, but actually in 2011 only 20 countries put it into practice. There are mainly states in the Far East and Asia, which are among the countries applying the death penalty. The leader in the number of annual executions is China, followed by Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and others. Among the leading countries in the number of executions is also the U.S. However, as shown by various surveys, substantial annual fluctuations views on the death penalty has undergone in the American society.
Sociologists believe that the change of mood in society is connected with the fact that the insecurity of citizens in the fairness of sentences grows. The executive director of the Center for Information on the Death Penalty (English Death Penalty Information Center) Richard Dieter in the interview to the newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta has also confirmed that judicial errors affected the image of Americans.
In the U.S., as around the world, the death penalty is one of the most depressing and serious issues facing society. Supporters and opponents of the abolition of this penalty express many reasons in support of its position. American scientists, in turn, have conducted studies that confirm the deterrent of the death penalty. Researchers at Emory University found that each execution prevents 18 criminal homicides. Scientists from the University of Houston noted in their studies that the Illinois moratorium on executions, which had entered into right in 2000, directly or indirectly provoked 150 homicides. Professor Roy Adler and Michael Summers of Pepperdine University in their studies also agree with Voroshilov: With each execution in each subsequent year is less than 75 kills.
One is of the main arguments of opponents of the death penalty is an unacceptably high risk of a miscarriage of justice and the possibility to sentence an innocent man to death. Thus, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, for 20 years - from 1973 to 1997 years - an annual average of 2.5 persons condemned to death were released from it, because it turned out that they were unjustly convicted. Since 1972 to 1999, there have been 82 people released from death row. In 2009, this figure has grown to 139 people.
In 2004 in the State of Texas, Cameron Todd Willingham had been executed for the murder of his children. During the whole process, as it later turned out, sufficient evidence of his guilt was not provided, and some witnesses changed their testimony. On the basis of the charges, which included the statement of a specialist in fire, who suggested that the fire that killed the children could be arson, and that the defendant refused from the test on a lie detector, the person was judged.
On the side of Willingham was forensic Commission of Texas, which rejected the arguments of the prosecution. The defendant refused to start the process of dealing with justice; and in exchange for the preservation of life he agreed to confess in doing a crime. However, for 12 years he was trying to prove his innocence. In 2009, the question of guilt of Willingham was raised again after experts confirmed the absence of the proof that the fire was arson. This case aroused extensive debate in the society. According to some experts, it could be the first recognized case of judicial error in Texas that resulted in the unjust death sentence.
In 2007 in Texas a man, who not only did not commit the crime, but was not even connected to the victim; moreover, he and did not see anything. He was sitting in the car, and thus was sentenced to death penalty for murder. This ajudication is become possible by a series of procedural errors made in the investigation and judgment. Executive director of the Washington Death Penalty Information Center, Richard Dieter confirmed that the percentage of miscarriages is high:
People were sentenced to death, and then there were new evidence - DNA or something else ... No one wants to execute an innocent man. And there is no absolute guarantee. As a result, in my opinion, the prosecutors are less likely to claim the death penalty, because they do not believe they will be able to convince the jury, and that the later sentence is revised.
The process became very slow. It is stretched for nearly 15 years from sentencing to execution. Because of the previous known mistakes, selection and consideration of such cases have become more thorough. Lawyers, investigators and experts are given more time. Of course, even now sometimes prosecution charges the death penalty, especially on the loud cases. But not in normal daily practice.
In December 2010, there were suggestions in the media about the possible decision in the state of Texas to abolish the death penalty because of the number of miscarriages of justice, and in May 2012 a report by Columbia University, which professor James Liebman called "The Namesake Carlos analysis unjust penalty", was published. 436-page study carried out by the team of 13 people for 6 years have described in detail the history of 27-year old Carlos Deluna. The man was executed in 1989 for the murder committed in 1983, argued wrong verdict and called as the cause of a miscarriage of justice negligent investigation. The purpose of the lawyers, according to Liebman, was to prove that Texas executes not only indeed guilty convicts. For fear of making a mistake, many states, even those that have in their penal code capital punishment, in practice do not use it.
Factors against Death Penalty
Economic factor
Another argument against the death penalty is that it is economically inefficient. As of 1998, the death penalty of one criminal costs $ 2 million, while the prison for 30 years costs about $ 700 thousand. According to the magazine Power, the cost of penalty is made up of many factors. First of all, the fact that a convicted person has the right to appeal to a higher authority, which implies the payment to the group of experts, housing and food pay for selected jury and free consulting analyst for executioners, etc.
According to data for 2009, presented by Death Penalty Information Center, capital punishment annual cost budget of $ 10 million, which is more than life in prison. For example, California spends $ 130 million for the maintenance of 700 sentenced to death.
Factor of xenophobia
Activists against the death penalty also note that death sentences are usually of racist connotation. Opinion polls and statistics indicate that death sentences are carried out more often for members of racial and ethnic minorities. However, the statistics of executions of the death penalty in 2010 shows that 19 people of the 35 executed were white.
In April 2012, the death sentence that was passed to African American Marcus Robinson, who was judged for the murder of a white teenager in 1991, was eliminated by the state of North Carolina. The court ruled that the original verdict could be made with racial bias - 9 of 12 jurors were white - and commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment.
The problem of the deterrent effect of the death penalty has a long history. Indeed, in ancient Greece deterrent effect of the death penalty was questioned by Diodotus.
It is noted that in most cases the offender expects to escape punishment, so that the death penalty does not have the desired deterrent effect. Also, a person who commits a crime punishable by death and persecuted by justice, may find that in a situation, when he has nothing to lose. This mental picture results in committing new crimes, including those done with the aim to avoid liability. It is noted that the death penalty is ineffective in respect of one of the most dangerous categories of contemporary criminals: terrorists and extremists. It is also ineffective to those, who commit crimes being extremist and politically motivated, as many of them are suicidal or constantly risk their lives in the course of a crime. Similar experiments were carried out in many countries, and they have shown that the abolition of the death penalty does not cause significant changes in the dynamics of murder crimes.
Many supporters of the death penalty try to persuade opponents in the fact that life imprisonment is the most severe punishment. However, recent studies have shown that life imprisonment for murderers though a lot softer, the criminals fear death penalty most.
Many relatives of the victims said that they believe the death penalty is fair, and they do not believe in a life sentence as a way of retaliation. The principle of retaliation Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, and life for life in this case does not work. Film director Stanislav Govorukhin believes that it is important to distinguish between revenge and retribution, and if the relatives of the victims are asking for tough punishment from the state, it is not revenge, but just retribution. Journalist Maxim Shevchenko agrees with him, recognizing the ineffectiveness of the death penalty from the perspective of criminology, but saying about an adequate return appropriate to the crime.
According to a number of opponents of the death penalty, its use as a means of restoring of social justice represents a return to the principle of retaliation, rejected by modern law, which raises the legal nihilism. In addition, it is noted that even the death of the murderer is not always able to make up for the weight of losing the loved one.
Scientific studies have failed to find convincing evidence that the death penalty is a more effective means of reducing crime than other punishments. The most recent study, commissioned by the United Nations in 1988 and updated in 2002, examined the relationship between the death penalty and homicide, and it was concluded that ... It is not prudent to accept the hypothesis that capital punishment affects the decrease in the number of murders to a marginally greater extent than does the threat and application of less severe, at first sight, punishment - imprisonment for life .
Criminal penalty creates the illusion that the society is cleared and that the life of its members became safer. Punishment does not promote the fight with social causes of serious crimes. On the contrary, the atmosphere of violence and murderous ruthlessness in society, which is legitimized by the state that uses capital punishment, only creates new opportunities and favorable conditions for an even more terrible and violent crimes. The main factors causing crime are poverty, ignorance, inequality, mental disorders of a specific criminal. The death penalty cannot affect these causes.
Europes Attitude Regarding the Death Penalty
The U.S. received many critical comments from European countries on the application of the death penalty. The European Union has repeatedly urged the United States to impose a moratorium on the death penalty, and in the future to give it up completely. In addition, the United States have been criticized by the Vatican.
The lack of solidarity of the developed world on this issue creates a number of problems. In particular, as stated by justice minister of Denmark Lene Espersen, no country in the EU will give the United States a suspect of one, who committed a crime, if in America they would face the death penalty. An additional problem for the United States can be denial of their observer status in the Council of Europe.
Ethical Arguments
In addition to the probability of a miscarriage of justice, and economic arguments speaking against the death penalty, there are some ethical arguments, such as:
- The death penalty has morally corrupting effect on human society.
It has a direct impact through the people, who are involved in it, and indirect effect - that, in a society by the fact of the presence of the death penalty the idea that killing in some particular cases may be fair, beneficial to society, a good deed is approved.
It is carried out only as something inhuman and shameful: executioners often hide their profession, and such methods of the death penalty are applied that to make impossible even to know who serves as the executioner.
- Death penalty is anti-legal act.
The basic principle of the law is the balance of personal freedom and the common good. The death penalty, which destroys the individual, liquidates legal relationship itself.
In the case of death penalty actually relatives of criminal are subject to punishment as well, because it can have such a strong influence on them that can reach out to suicide or madness, not to mention their heavy moral suffering.
- The death penalty is unfair and deceitful because it clearly violates the human limits of competence. There is no person who has the power over life. Life is a condition of all human affairs, and should preserve their frames. However, the man has no right to judge anyone's guilt, much less to state about perfect incorrigibility of a criminal.
Experimental observations of scientists have shown that the death penalty is often applied to the person to whom it was intended, and presents deep spiritual revolution. The one sentenced to death begins to look at the world differently, experiencing enlightenment. In the end, in some cases, the death penalty, even if it is not a miscarriage of justice, is implemented when there's really no need in it.
- The death penalty is an attack on fundamental moral principle of self-worth of the human person, its holiness. To the extent that we equate morality to non-violence, to the commandment Thou shalt not kill, the death penalty cannot be a moral sanction, as it is the exact opposite.
In conclusion, it should be noted that, although ethical arguments in favor of the abolition of death penalty do not have a logical constraint, nevertheless there are a large number of people, who seem to be quite convincing.
Now in the U.S. there is a general reduction in the use of the death penalty as a punishment. Over the 2000s, the number of death sentences has fallen by more than half from 300 to 115, the same trend is observed in the conduct of the execution.
Despite the fact that the U.S. is not going to abolish the death penalty at the federal level, certain trends can be seen now. In 2008, the country had fulfilled the smallest number of executions since 1994. Some decisions were made in the U.S that exemplified the positive overturn in the application of the death penalty. Thus, in 2002 the U.S. Supreme Court overturned its own decision of 1989, under which execution of mentally retarded criminals was permitted. According to the court, the execution of such offenders is unconstitutional.
In addition, in 2005 the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the death penalty as punishment for young offenders. Before lifting, the punishment was considered legal in 19 states and could be applied to the criminals from 16 years.
The current U.S. President Barack Obama is holding the position of opposing the death penalty. Attitude to the death penalty is gradually changing also among the advocates of such a punishment. For example, Senator Stephen Lynch of Massachusetts and a conservative Republican from Virginia Frank Hargrove changed their position and now are in favor of abolition of the death penalty.
See other articles on https://best-writing-service.com/essays/informative/ancient-roman-inventions-and-technology.
