THE DEATH PENALTY 1

The Death Penalty

Adrilyn Gurr

Criminal Justice 1010

Mr. Chris Bertram

November 25, 2020

THE DEATH PENALTY 2

Abstract

The divide of opinion surrounding the criminal justice system and the death penalty in the

United States is highly contriversal. Capital punishment for crime orginated during the founding

of the United States, and still remains an option for sentencing in many states. This paper will

examine both sides of the fence regarding cost, morality, and constitutionality as it relates to the

death penalty. Throughout this paper ideas, ideals, and educated opinions towards the current

state of capital punishment within the United States will be exemplified and discussed. Research

was conducted through extensive analyzing of educated opinion pieces, personal experience

stories, and the writings of experts in the criminal justice field. This paper was written with

intentions to provide a fresh viewpoint on multiple existing ideas; accompanied by an objective

that will allow readers to develop a stronger understanding and sense of the factors associated

with the death penalty and its consequences.

Introduction

Since the beginning of human life, the law of retaliation has been utilized to govern and

protect societies. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth was the primary principle used

throughout the world for thousands of years. The death penalty is a contriversal topic that

arouses strong emotions and produces heated debates. In our modern day, most nations around

the world have eliminated the use of capital punishment. The United States remains on the fence

with allowing the death penalty as punishment for severe crimes in 28 of the 50 states. Typically,

capital punishment is reserved strictly for violent crimes. A Ga​llup poll from May on the topic

found that 61 percent of Americans view the death penalty as morally acceptable, and only 30

percent disagreed (​Muhlhausen, 2014)​. ​Those in support of the death penalty argue that it is

more cost effective, is a fair punishment for violent crime, and it does not violate the
THE DEATH PENALTY 3

Consitution. It also acts as a deterrent for other criminals or those thinking about committing a

crime. Those in support of abolishing the death penalty argue that it costs more to maintain death

row facilities, killing is morally wrong no matter the sitution, and captial punishment violates the

eighth ammedment. They feel they are powerfully positioned with one foot in the future while

their opponents stand in the past. “Advocates of abolition see themselves as belonging to a

different epoch, one in which human nature itself has changed (Garland, McGowen, & Meranze,

2011).” Citizens have called out to leaders and demanded reform, the opposing sides each having

different ideals and solutions.

Inmates who are sentenced to the death penalty are sent to seperate death row facilities or

designated death row portions of facilities. They are typically isolated from others and spend 23

hours a day in their cell. Inmates are not given a specific day or timeline as to when their

execution will take place. The uncertainty creates anxiety and can quickly take a toll on one's

mental health. Some prisoners have spent more than twenty years on death row. Time between

sentencing and execution has continued to grow in recent years. Inmates are typically given

24-72 hours of notice once a date has been decided.

Cost

Reported in 2019, The Bureau of Justice Statistics reckons that the United States spends

more than $80 billion each year to keep roughly 2.3 million people behind bars. The average cost

per inmate, per year is around $40,000. A vast majority of people would likely agree that

economics and money should never be the determining factor of life and death. However, the

criminal justice and prisons systems use billions of tax dollars each year. Most defendants who

are sentenced to death essentially end up spending life in prison, but at a highly inflated cost

because the death penalty was involved in the process.​ ​The cost of the death penalty has
THE DEATH PENALTY 4

repeatedly been found to be more expensive than the cost of regular incarceration. A handful of

scholars have pointed out the high post of the death penalty and argue that reallocating these

funds to mental health programs would better serve as a deterrant to crime by helping those who

struggle with mental illness. “A 2003 legislative audit in Kansas found that the estimated cost of

a death penalty case was 70% more than the cost of a comparable non-death penalty case. Death

penalty case costs were counted through to execution with a median cost $1.26 million.

Non-death penalty case costs were counted through to the end of incarceration with a median

cost of $740,000 (Amnesty International, 2017).” A more recent and detailed study conducted in

Oregon concluded that the costs for aggravated murder cases that resulted in death sentences

ranged from about $800,000 to over $1,000,000 more per case when compared to similar

non-death sentence aggravated murder cases (De Muniz, 2019). Similar research has begun in a

majority of other states as well.

Those who support the death penalty believe that by reorganzing how the death penalty

punishment process runs to be more prompt could save millions in tax dollars. Instead of

spending money on solitary confinement for decades, the death penalty should have an instilled

time frame between sentencing and execution. These funds could then be reallocated and be put

towards programs that help citizens in need, rather than feeding, clothing, and sheltering violent

criminals.

Those who wants to abolish the death penalty believe that death rows should beridden of.

These prisoners should be able to have a second chance at life and the chance to start the

rehabilitation process if they choose to do so. Already statistically proven, it would additionally

cut costs and allow tax dollars to be allocated elsewhere, if the chance to be sentenced to death

was eliminated.
THE DEATH PENALTY 5

Morality

The determination of good and bad will vary between each individual. Morals are

established during childhood and can change throughout one’s life. Controversial topics, like the

death penalty, are frequently address by politicians. During a legislative summit in 2019, a panel

of lawmakers were asked a number of questions about their thoughts on the death penalty.

Democrats and Republicans are well known for having polarized opinions, however the

responses from this panel did not align based on political party. There was a diversity of opinion,

both in support and for abolishment on both sides. Demonstrating that morality is based on life

experiences more than anything else. Paul Ray, a Utah Republican Representative who is in

favor of the death penalty, stated: “What I explain to people is that this issue is personal, and you

have to let people come to their own decisions (Widgery, 2020).” Morals are based upon life

experiences and the shoes someone has walked in, that is why we are all our own unique person.

Morality must be taken into consideration when dealing with an individual's right to live or die

based upon their actions. Rhonda Fields, a Colorado Democratic Senator, shared her story and

discussed her support for the death penalty. Fields lost her son and his fiancé when they were

murdered. The two people who took her family away from her are now on death row in

Colorado. She spoke about how little the death penalty is used in her state, but in violent

instances, that it should be used (Widgery, 2020). Those who support the death penalty believe

that violent offenders should be brought to justice and not be allowed to recenter society, as they

are a danger to others. On the other hand, Renny Cushing, a New Hampshire Democratic

Representative, argues that capital punishment does not accomplish the bringing back of loved

ones. Those against the death penalty believe that ending another human beings life is not a
THE DEATH PENALTY 6

morally acceptable way to deliver justice. An offender should have the chance at rehabilitation

and the right to life, regardless of the extent of an offense. “All lives have value, no matter the

vile, heinous, or horrible act perpetrated by the accused (De Muniz, 2019).” Both perspectives

are valid. Family members of murder victims do not all share the same thoughts regarding the

imposition of the death penalty on perpertrators, however some have spoken out about not

wanting the loss of their loved one to lead to the loss of another individual. There have been

many instances when the family members of victims advocated for the killer not to be sentenced

to death and they choose to forgive them. Forgiveness is described as a choice people make for

themselves, one that requires hard work and willingness to dive deeply into pain and grief with

hopes to transcend and lead a full life (King, 2003). Reverting back to each of us being different

from the other, some people may be able to forgive, while others cannot. Each route is

acceptable and to be understood.

Constitutionality

The United States constitution, amendment number eight states: “Excessive bail shall not

be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” This

amendment was created to protect citizens by limiting the types of punishments the government

can inflict upon individuals who have committed a crime. It can be argued both ways, especially

while examining what methods are used. Some feel that the death penalty is cruel and unusual,

especially in our evolving society. Andrea Lyon, a law school dean, wrote: “The mere fact that

drafters of the Constitution did not find the death penalty cruel and unusal when they wrote the

amendment does not preclude the Supreme court from finding it cruel and unusual in

contemporary society.” Others feel that the death penalty is necessary and should remain in place
THE DEATH PENALTY 7

because s​ome crimes are so heinous and inherently wrong that they demand strict penalties – up

to and including life sentences or even death (​Muhlhausen, 2014).

The Supreme Court has never addressed or decided whether the death penalty deprives

the fundamental right to life mentioned in the Fourteenth ammendment. The deliverance of the

death penalty is also another issue. “Retribution is also not served by the death penalty, which

gives [punishments] to only some offenders, provides closure to only some family members, and

expresses society’s outrage for only some murders. Such results do not restore balance to the

moral order; they perpetuate imbalance (Barry, 2019).” The use of the death penalty is quite

imbalanced. It is only to be utilized in the most extreme cases, the outlook of extreme will be

different to each case, judge, and jury of that case. Not all murderers are sentenced to death, only

some.

One of the main purposes and duties established by the government is to keep its citizens

safe. The death penalty acts as a deterrant for criminal activity, it is the ultimate punishment and

not something that can be reversed. “The presence of capital punishment in the portfolio of legal

authorities creates (greater) uncertainty in the perpetrators’ minds (because the variation in the

possible punishments increases) about the severity of punishment, and this greater uncertainty

would decrease expected returns on investments in illegal activities, leading to their reduction

(Goel & Mazhar, 2019).” This concept applies heavily to white collar crimes, though they may

not always be extremely violent, harm is still done to the United States and its citizens. Research

done inside and outside of the United States, on 150 nations, concludes that corruption is shown

to go down when there is capital punishment for non-violent crimes (Goel & Mazhar, 2019).
THE DEATH PENALTY 8

Conclusion

The death penalty still poses as a conversation that needs to be had within ourselves and

our government. By utilizing results from studies and testing out new methods of incarceration

and rehabilitation, it is highly likely that lives will be bettered inside and outside of prisons. The

death penalty is merely part of the ongoing controversy surrounding the criminal justice system

and mass imprisonment in the United States. Analyzing the data and ideas of others provides an

opportunity to open eyes and determine the most wise course of action regarding cost, morality,

and constitutionally what is acceptable, as well as what needs to change. Nevertheless, each

situation and case are unique and must be approached as so. Different people will have different

points of view and various reactions. Taking a step back and walking in another's shoes for a

moment can give an individual the chance to better understand a human being different from

themselves. In addition to allowing us to better understand each other, being an informed and

mindful member of society allows for progressive advancements to take place.

THE DEATH PENALTY 9

Sources

Amnesty International. (2017, May 18). Death Penalty Cost.

https://www.amnestyusa.org/issues/death-penalty/death-penalty-facts/death-penalty-cost/

Barry, K. M. (2019). The Death Penalty and the Fundamental Right to Life. ​Boston College Law

Review​, ​60​(6), 1545–1604.

David Garland, Randall McGowen, & Michael Meranze. (2011). ​America’s Death Penalty :

Between Past and Present​. NYU Press.

De Muniz, P. J. (2019). The Exceedingly High Cost of Oregon’s Death Penalty. ​Willamette Law

Review​, ​56​(1), 45–49.

Death Penalty Information Center. (2014, December 17). Costs. Retrieved November 03, 2020,

from https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/costs

Goel, R. K., & Mazhar, U. (2019). Does capital punishment deter white-collar crimes? ​World

Economy,​ ​42(​ 6), 1873–1897. https://doi-org.libprox1.slcc.edu/10.1111/twec.12739

King, R. (2003). ​Don't kill in our names: Families of murder victims speak out against the death

penalty.​ New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Lyon, Andrea D. (2014). ​The Death Penalty : What’s Keeping It Alive.​ Rowman & Littlefield

Publishers.

Muhlhausen, D. B. (2014, September 29). How the Death Penalty Saves Lives.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/09/29/the-death-penalty-saves-lives-by-d

eterring-crime

Widgery, A. (2020). Debating the Death Penalty: Capital punishment divides legislators, but not

along party lines. ​State Legislatures​, ​46​(1), 28–31.

THE DEATH PENALTY 10

Reflection

● What assumptions have you made (outside of the research information evaluated)?

○ Are those assumptions valid?

I honestly was middle ground going into writing this paper. I really enjoy the Netflix series “I

Am A Killer.” It shares the stories of death row inmates from all perspectives of those involved,

the killer, the victims family, and the officers who were involved. It fascinated me how different

stories were from each perspective and I was interested to learn more about the process and

thoughts about the death penalty. Assumptions I had before research: I thought that the death

penalty would be more cost effective opposed to regular incarceration, which is false. I would

say my assumption is valid. My thought process was that if there are less people incarcerated,

that is less tax dollars being spent on food, staff, and everything else it takes to run a prison.

● Do you need to investigate more facts and data?

I feel that I effectively covered both sides and perspectives of the argument about the death

penalty. I utilized both facts based upon scientific studies, but I also included personal stories

and opinions because this topic is about life and death. Life and death is something that is based

upon morals, meaning each individual will have a different outlook.

● Does the conclusion you came to make sense?

The conclusion I came to was to encourage readers to decide for themselves, and to be able to

think about the perspectives on both sides of the argument. I feel that I effectively present the

information in an engaging and easily digestible way for the reader to contemplate. The topic is

definitely something that will be thought of differently by different people.

THE DEATH PENALTY 11

● Does the information researched, and your assumptions support the conclusion?

○ If so, why? If not, why not?

Yes! I based my research on what I felt were some of the largest reasons for arguments about the

death penalty. Cost was one of my assumptions and the research I did on cost showed me the

facts and explanation for said costs. Morals was one that I utilized personal stories and educated

opinion pieces to develop. Constitutionality was a combination of both, I examined our

Constitution and read pieces from expert criminologists doing the same.

● Did you ask the right questions?

I think that I did ask the right questions. I brought up arguably the three largest argumentative

categories regarding the death penalty and if it should be abolished or supported. I examined

both sides and tried to make the questions surround opinions for supporters and abolitionists.

● Did you ask enough questions?

Upon completion of my paper and while writing I wondered if I could do a separate section on

the concept of deterrence. That was a recurring topic within all of the research I did and

everything I read. I decided not to do a separate section on deterrence, but likely could’ve. If I

were to edit this paper or change anything I feel that I could expand on that idea and make it into

its own section.

● Was there more than one possible conclusion?

○ If so, did you pick the right one from the facts and data?

I feel that there is more than one possible conclusion regarding the death penalty and my

assignment. I utilized facts, stories, and educated opinions from both sides of the fence. I
THE DEATH PENALTY 12

included opinions because the topic is controversial and opinions are typically developed based

on personal experience and upbringing. My main goal was to allow a reader to develop their own

opinion and be able to see from both perspectives of an individual. Especially someone who may

be a family member of a victim. I think it is important to remember people deal with things

differently than how we may.

● How has this assignment shaped or changed your perspective concerning the issue?

This assignment really opened my eyes regarding each of the three categories, especially cost.

Morally I am in support of both of the sides, I think largely the decision should be up to the

victims families and they deserve all of the empathy and support. In some instances, I think

criminals and killers can be rehabilitated and have an honest, true intent to better themselves.

Other times I would say some people really just want to watch the world burn and do not, likely

will never care to learn from their mistakes and better themselves. Constitutionally was

something I did not think about until I started doing research. That portion of my paper was one

that really opened my eyes and made me realize how unbalanced the use of the death penalty can

be. Overall, I was able to learn a lot and see from two different pairs of eyes, both with valid

points.