Capital Punishment

Coretta Scott King, late wife of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr., once said "I stand firmly and unequivocally opposed to the death penalty for those convicted of capital offenses. An evil deed is not redeemed by an evil deed of retaliation. Justice is never advanced in the taking of a human life. Morality is never upheld by a legalized murder" (Gottfried, 2002, p. 46). This quote alone could not possibly portray the gist of my belief on Capital Punishment any better than it already does. Capital Punishment is murder, plain and simple. In the following paragraphs I have provided the history of Capital Punishment along with general facts and ethical issues about the subject. This information will lead to my explanation of the most valid ethical approach to solving this problem.

Capital Punishment, as well as campaigns opposing it, has been in our nation's history since the beginning (Gottfried, 2002, p. 24). After British law, execution was a punishment approved and supported by most of the leaders of the new nation (Gottfried, 2002, p. 25). Thomas Alva Edision invented the electric chair and it was first used on August 6, 1890 (Wolf, 1997, p. 25). The electric chair became the most popular form of execution during the early twentieth century. By 1951, 26 American states used the electric chair to perform their executions. Currently, only 11 states have chosen to still use the electric chair (Wolf, 1997, p. 26). The gas chamber was invented in 1924 by D.A. Turner. Currently the method of the gas chamber is used in only seven states. Lastly, lethal injection was first used in 1977 in Oklahoma and currently is the main method chosen in 32 states (Wolf, 1997, p. 27).

A capital case is defined as when the crime involved is premeditated and there are no justifying circumstances. It is punishable by death (Gottfried, 2002, p. 12-13). A poll taken in June of 2000 by Newsweek magazine found that 73% of the 750 people polled were in favor of the death penalty. However, it is believed that the opinion and the views of the American public are slowly changing. Another poll taken in 2000 by the Gallup Organization asked the question of whether a first degree murderer should be punished by death or by life imprisonment. When given the option of life imprisonment, only 56% of the people polled were in favor of death, while 38% supported life imprisonment without the chance of parole (Gottfried, 2002, p. 13). Many people think that the opinion of the American public reflects the context of the question asked. When given an option, many people will opt for another form of punishment other than death (Gottfried, 2002, p. 13).

Many people are in favor of the death penalty because they think that it prevents more murder and more crime from occurring. However, other people believe the exact opposite. "One of the primary reasons for administering the death penalty is to control crime, but many people question the death penalty's deterrent effect, and some people even assert that watching the government kill people makes citizens even more likely to commit murder" (Marzilli, 2003, p. 18-19). In 1980, the homicide rates in New York were examined during the years of 1907 to 1963. During this period of time, New York was the state that executed the most people. In general, homicide rates increased in the month after an execution took place. "When the state takes a person's life by execution, it devalues human life in the eyes of its citizens, making them more likely to commit murder" (Marzilli, 2003, p. 39).

In the 1960s, the amount of executions decreased intensely. In 1965 there were seven executions that took place in the United States, opposed to the 152 that were performed in 1947. By the year 1967, there were only two. "In 1967, public opinion was overwhelmingly opposed to the death penalty" (Gottfried, 2002, p. 31). The following year there were no executions that took place in the United States. This suspension went on for nine years (Gottfried, 2002, p. 31). One of the main reasons for the suspension was that the United States Supreme Court had been influenced by the attitudes of American society. People stood strongly against the death penalty. In 1972, The Supreme Court ruled that Capital Punishment laws were unconstitutional. Capital Punishment consisted of the cruel and unusual punishments that were explained and banned by the eighth amendment to the United States Constitution (Gottfried, 2002, p. 31). In 1976, the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty after 9 years of not using it. The court decided that death as a punishment for murder is not unjustified. And so, the death penalty did not fall under the category of cruel and unusual punishments (Gottfried, 2002, p. 32). How can death (murder) not be a form of cruel and unusual punishment? This question is especially important in the case of John Evans. John Evans was executed by electrocution in 1983. Those people who witnessed his execution said that Evans received three different charges of electrocution in just fourteen minutes. After the first two times he was electrocuted, he was still awake and smoke was rising off his skin because he had been burnt so badly. Those who saw this horrible event take place later referred to it as a "barbaric ritual" (http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~tonya/spring/cap/con2.htm). Taking someone's life from them, and leaving their friends and family in despair is one of, if not the, most cruel things known to man. The fact that Capital Punishment was once protected by the eighth amendment in 1972, and now it is not protected by it, is a huge ethical issue in my opinion. Using death as a punishment is the most cruel and unusual way.

The National Organization of Parents of Murdered Children (POMC) is a group that is highly involved in the matter of Capital Punishment. This organization once said that "By executing murderers, you prevent them from murdering again and...save a life" (Gottfried, 2002, p. 36). I do not agree with this quote. Instead of executing a criminal, he or she should be put in a maximum security prison for life. This way, he will not murder again and he has to live with what he has done for the rest of his life. There is a small chance that the criminal could break out of prison and kill again. However, if the criminal is known to be that dangerous, he should be put in solitary confinement. It is impossible to escape solitary confinement. He would live the rest of his life in one room and would be monitored 24 hours a day. There are many possible solutions to be sure that a criminal will not kill again. Death does not have to be one of them.

Ernest van den Haag is a prestigious professor in North Carolina as well as a pro-death penalty advocate. He once said that "Nature has