1

Running head: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

Capital Punishment: Should it Stay in Effect?

Joshua T. Sherod

Sinclair Community College

November 28, 2018

 2
Running head: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
Capital Punishment: Should it Stay in Effect?

Introduction

Capital punishment is defined in the dictionary as “the legally authorized killing of

someone as punishment for a crime.” This is typically used in severe cases such as first-degree

murder, espionage, treason, and genocide. There are multiple ways to carry out capital

punishment such as by firing squad, lethal injection, and the electric chair. It has been used

throughout history and its origin dates back to the 18th century B.C. in ancient Babylon. It has

been around for centuries and is still in effect today. Capital punishment, or the death penalty,

should stay in effect because it reduces expenses, it is logical for someone who kills to be killed,

it acts as a deterrent to other criminals, and overall it is a morally correct punishment.

Expense and Overcrowding

Most people have thought that the death penalty is too expensive and that it costs more

than life without parole (LWOP). It does cost a lot of money for a capital murder case to be

carried, but “the Commission members believed that the greater cost associated with capital

murder cases is essential to guarantee a vigorous defense, a thorough investigation and

prosecution of the case, and careful adjudication of the case” (Reams and Putnam, 2011). This

means that in capital murder cases more money is spent on the court case than the action itself.

There is more defense, investigation, and prosecution in a capital murder case than there is in an

LWOP case; this makes the capital murder case cost more but not the act of capital punishment.

When thinking of capital punishment, a person sentenced to death would usually spend a

maximum of 10 years in prison whereas, according to Reams and Putnam, “it is more expensive

to house an inmate sentenced to LWOP than an inmate serving a three to six-year sentence”
 3
Running head: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
(2011). While it does cost a lot for capital murder cases to go through, LWOP inmates spend a

lot more time in prison which racks up a lot more money. Not only does it cost a lot to house the

inmates, but the prisons also have to worry about medical care. As said in The Costs of Capital

Punishment, “prisoners who are serving LWOP sentences have much higher total costs, such as

medical costs associated with geriatric care, medical care for chronic health issues and ‘end of

life’ care” (Reams and Putnam, 2011). In the end, capital punishment is the most cost-effective

way to punish capital crimes.

Logic

Keeping the death penalty in effect is a very logical decision for the United States

Judicial systems to make. Capital punishment is widely associated with revenge or an ‘eye for an

eye,’ but it is the government’s way of properly punishing capital crimes. “Professor Robert

Blecker of the New York law school debunks the argument that retribution is equated with

revenge. He said in 2014 that whereas revenge knows no bounds, retribution governed by what is

proportionate and appropriate is not vengeful” (2018). This quote from Why Capital Punishment

has to Return supports the reasoning that capital punishment is not the same as vengeance; it is

merely seeking justice. If a family wants to prosecute a murderer of their loved one, that isn’t

trying to get revenge it is just seeking justice to help mentally cope with the trauma. Capital

punishment has worked very effectively throughout its lifespan. According to Changing Times in

America’s Execution Capital, “since 1976, when the US Supreme Court upheld capital

punishment 1,469 people have been executed in the US- 548 in Texas” (Jeffrey, 2018). The

number of people that have been executed shows how effectively the death penalty has worked

within this time. Even though many people disagree with capital punishment, “According to the

results of a 2017 Gallup poll, 55 percent of Americans say they are in favor of the death penalty
 4
Running head: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
for a person convicted of murder” (Jeffrey, 2018). This means that the majority of Americans

still agree with the primary use of the death penalty.

Deterrent

Capital punishment has proven to be a sufficient deterrent against violent crimes. Kent

Scheidegger, the Legal Director of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, said “anyone who

says it has been definitively proved that the death penalty has no deterrent effect either doesn’t

know what they are talking about or they’re lying” (Jeffrey, 2018). Scheidegger stated that there

is no definite proof that capital punishment has no deterrent effects. However, in Why Capital

Punishment has to Return, the author states that “what is clear is that imprisonment is no

deterrent to the tsunami of violent crime” (2018). The author is saying that LWOP is not putting

enough fear in criminals who commit capital crimes. If the United States decides to void the

death penalty, then “as long as a murderer knows that his right to life, dignity, and equality will

be upheld regardless of the brutality of his crimes, and that some legal quirk may mitigate his

prison sentence, violent crimes in this country will continue undeterred” (Why Capital

Punishment has to Return, 2018). If the criminal has no fear of his life being taken, then he or

she will not be deterred from committing violent crimes. There are many people who are afraid

to die and if their right to life is secured, then they might think irrationally and commit severe

crimes.

Moral

Many may think that the use of capital punishment is immoral, but this is not the case.

The families of the victims who have been ripped away from them deserve to know that this

killer won’t get away with his crimes and will receive the ultimate punishment. According to a
 5
Running head: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
story from Changing Times in America’s Execution Capital, “in 2003 Thomas Whitaker

arranged for a friend to kill his father, mother and brother to get the family inheritance. Despite

being wounded in the chest, Kent Whitaker survived, hearing the two shots that killed his wife

and other son” (Jeffrey, 2018). This is a prime example of a person that would receive capital

punishment. He had a friend kill his brother, mother, and almost his father just to receive his

family’s money. This father will never have the same life without his family and will be scarred

by his sons attempt on his life. Everyone deserves their right to life but taking someone else’s

deserves punishment. Even people who don’t agree with capital punishment make an exception

for especially heinous crimes. Andy Kahan, from the source Changing Times in America’s

Execution Capital, said “watching an execution is the most mentally draining experience, but it

should be utilized for those who commit the most heinous, diabolical, despicable crimes known

to man that cry out for the ultimate punishment” (Jeffrey, 2018). Even someone who disagreed

with the death penalty saw that if the crime was severe enough the criminal deserved the

‘ultimate punishment.’ Some may not agree with the use of capital punishment, but they agree

that heinous crimes deserve harsh punishments. People may think that capital punishment is

degrading or cruel, but they don’t look at the other side of the case; they don’t look at what the

criminal did to get in that position. As said in Why Capital Punishment has to Return, “Justice

Chaskalson’s assertion that capital punishment is ‘degrading’ and ‘cruel’ is devoid of context

and makes a mockery of any claim to moral order for the simple reason that it ignores what

murder victims suffer at the hands of murderers” (Why Capital Punishment has to Return, 2018).

The Justice is looking at how cruel it is to execute another human being, but they aren’t looking

at the murder that the criminal committed to be given that punishment.

Counter Argument
 6
Running head: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
On the other hand, most people often assume that there might be innocent people

wrongly convicted of capital crimes. Heather Beaudoin, a member of Conservatives Concerned

About the Death Penalty, said “More people know about the risks of innocent people being

executed after TV programs like 60 Minutes… They’re thinking, wow, this can happen— are we

willing to risk it?” (Herbert 2002) Beaudoin said this to emphasize the fact that innocent people

do receive capital punishment because they were accused of committing capital crimes. It is true

that the justice system makes mistakes, but “requiring that the legal system provide 100 percent

accuracy would effectively stop all decision-making in the legal system” (Reams and Putnam,

2011). The authors are saying that if the legal system had 100 percent accuracy on every single

case, then cases would just pile up for years and there wouldn’t be as many criminals being

convicted. There is also not a very good definition of what specific crimes get capital

punishment. There is a general idea, but it is all case by case; one case can receive capital

punishment while the other received LWOP. As said by the author of Trial and ‘Errors’ Turow’s

newest legal thriller explores pros and cons of capital punishment, “he said he recognizes the

‘visceral appeal’ of doling out ‘the ultimate punishment for the ultimate evil.’ But he questions,

‘How do we define the ultimate evil? If the Washington sniper deserves death, do we just say,

you are executed if you kill X number of people?" (Herbert, 2002). He asks what the definition

of the ultimate evil is because there isn’t anything specific that says you deserve the ultimate

punishment if you commit murder or any crime. It all depends on the case, the judge, and the

jury to decide what is ‘just.’ What is just? What makes us better than the criminal that we

execute? Capital punishment has its pros and its cons like every other problem in the world.

Conclusion
 7
Running head: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
Overall, capital punishment should stay in effect because it costs less than LWOP, it is a

logical punishment for capital murders, it deters other criminals from committing heinous

crimes, and it gives the families of the victims peace knowing that the criminal can’t hurt anyone

else. The death penalty is a very effective way to punish capital crimes such as murder, treason,

and espionage to help put an end to those crimes. Capital punishment deters criminals who value

their life too much to be on death row and cuts down costs that the government would have to

pay for housing of long-term inmates. It also helps victims get justice so that the criminal will

receive the full punishment. In the end, capital punishment should stay in effect because of its

many positive points.

 8
Running head: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
References

Herbert, R. (2002, November 22). Trial and `Errors'; Turow's newest legal thriller explores pros

and cons of capital punishment. Boston Herald, p. 047. Retrieved from

http://link.galegroup.com.sinclair.ohionet.org/apps/doc/A94551088/OVIC?u=dayt30401

&sid=OVIC&xid=a7ff92e3

Jeffrey, J. (2018). Changing times in America’s execution capital: A father’s successful struggle

to spare the son who killed the rest of the family highlights how Texas, historically

America’s top executioner, is moving away from the death penalty to reflect a national

trend. The Humanist, (3), 24. Retrieved from

http://sinclair.ohionet.org:80/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=tr

ue&db=edsgao&AN=edsgcl.537405303&site=eds-live

Reams, J. M., & Putnam, C. T. (2011). The costs of capital punishment litigation. New

Hampshire Bar journal, 52(2), 21–23. Retrieved from

http://sinclair.ohionet.org:80/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=tr

ue&db=a9h&AN=65294528&site=eds-live

Why capital punishment has to return. (2018). Daily news (South Africa). Retrieved from

http://sinclair.ohionet.org:80/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=tr

ue&db=edsgin&AN=edsgcl.541273373&site=eds-live