Why Capital Punishment Should Be Legalized

Given the global tragedies and massacres which have occurred with today’s society, where do you stand on the death penalty? This option is still accessible in 31 out of 50 states. For more than 50 years no one in the United States has been executed for crimes less than murder in practice. However, as of 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected the death penalty to be enforced in any crimes where death is not presented. Is executing a murderer murder in itself? Is there a line where it is accepted as a life for a life is justified? Society has now become morally blinded with those who are opposed to capital punishment.

I believe that executing a person who commits or threatens the community is necessary, especially when there is no remorse felt from the convicts themselves. Society has become morally blinded, with those who are opposed to capital punishment beginning with the expenses, overpopulation, mental health issues, and innocence.

Over the years homicide and violence have increased in the United States. The majority of humans are typically afraid of death itself. It becomes an uncomfortable subject when being brought up in any conversation. It is a sensitive matter when addressing an individual who has lost a loved one. If every murderer who has killed received the death penalty automatically would homicide decrease? Is this an appropriate scenario where the saying an eye for an eye comes into place? In most countries, the death penalty is still an option often practiced, meanwhile in the United States it differs state to state. If you are willing to commit a crime despite knowing the consequences afterward can be severe depending on the accusation, and then I believe regardless of race, poverty or wealth, you should pay for the consequences. If you do not care enough to hurt others. Why should society care about the convict when it comes down to the death penalty? Most of the time money is a huge factor in which route the government should take or the prisoner.

Capital punishment should be legalized in all states today, the capital punishment is the issue in hand that gets the nation separated. There are a lot of supporters who believe this “Capital Punishment” but there are also a lot of people who stand against this. In my opinion, I believe that capital punishment should be implemented in capital murder. After months of deliberations, the committee has concluded; this term is killing. Some would argue that this punishment fits the crime. Others are strongly confident that this capital punishment is careless, cruel, and unfair and it should be abolished. The capital punishment has been at existence in the United States since the early days. It was used to punish criminals by hanging or death by electric shock that passes through the body, which is still used today as a method of electrocution. The death penalty can be done in five different ways such as, Lethal injection, death by electricity, lethal gas, firing squad, and hanging. But now we have the death penalty for crimes such as treason, espionage, murder, large-scale drug trafficking, or attempted murder of a witness, juror, or court officer in certain cases. If the death penalty were abolished, there would be no need for executions because people who were convicted of these crimes would not be executed. But what would happen if these people got released on parole after committing such hatred crimes? If you are willing to commit a crime despite knowing the consequences afterward can be severe depending on the accusation, and then I believe regardless of race, poverty or wealth, you should pay for the consequences. If you do not care enough to hurt others. Why should society care about the convict when it comes down to the death penalty? This is why I strongly believe the death penalty is necessary for certain gruesome crimes.

Imposing a law such as the death penalty can benefit the government by not spending more money per inmate on food, health care, and other resources needed for survival in prison for inmates who are serving life. The death penalty can also be exercised to help decrease the crime rates committed in each state or country. It can prevent the inmate from committing the same crime after being released with a lesser accusation or committing another crime far worse than the first time, which may influence others around him, who may be non-violent, and can put others in society at risk. The more we can prevent a felon from committing a crime, the better chances we have from prisons becoming overpopulated.

According to the Death Penalty Information Center, the average cost of a case without capital punishment involved is $740,000. For cases where the death penalty is sought by prosecutors, the average cost of the case is &1.26 million. In addition to the prosecution expenses, the cost of housing a prisoner on death row is $90,000 more per year, on average, then a prisoner in the general population.

Now, based on the information given to us, if we have two cases without capital punishment that each cost $740,000 for an inmate who committed a crime other than rape, kidnapping, or murder; this now puts the government at $1,480,000 just for two cases. We currently have thousands of prisoners serving time and every year this amount increases. So, the amount that it is now costing the government has become billions, but expenses have become an issue for that one case which can cost the states $1.26 million to execute a person for murder, when we have already reached that amount with just two prisoners serving time. If we look at the amount that it costs for one-person $1.26 million sounds insane I would agree, but since when do we put a price on justice for our people? I believe the cost for a case where the death penalty is being exercised, should be dismissed when it comes to a crime that was taken to the extreme. I have included a picture below, which reveals how much prison expense is without capital punishment went beyond the intended budget in 2010. Would you agree that imposing a law such as the death penalty could benefit the government by not spending more money per inmate on food, health care, and other resources needed for survival in prison for inmates who are serving life. The death penalty can also be exercised to help decrease the crime rates committed in each state or country. It can prevent the inmate from committing the same crime after being released with a lesser accusation or committing another crime far worse than the first time, which may influence others around him, who may be non-violent, and can put others in society at risk. In other words, the amount of people on the death penalty is not excessively high as it was in the beginning years when capital punishment became an option for prisoners and has decreased significantly over the years. The more we can prevent a felon from committing a crime, the more chances we have for prisons to not become overpopulated.

In the United States, more than 2.3 million people are being held in state and federal prisons, local jails, Indian Country jails, juvenile correctional facilities, immigration detention centers, military prisons, and civil commitment centers. About 443,000 people have not been convicted of anything and are awaiting trial. Another 41,000 are in detention in immigration centers without conviction.

On the other hand, 704,000 prisoners are labeled as violent offenders in state prisons. Capital punishment laws create space for potential rehabilitation without dealing with issues of prison overpopulation. Overpopulation can also become costly beginning from employees, food, benefits, health care, supplies, and prison programs. When prisons become overpopulated this causes taxpayers costs to rise and can anger the population. Taxpayers who now spend billions of dollars to keep them funded will see a significant increase due to overpopulation. Prisons that become overpopulated can cause living space to be dramatically smaller. Crowded prisons sometimes lead to more crimes and death in the prisons. It becomes harder to maintain the inmates when it’s overpopulated. Crowding itself has been shown to increase the level of violence in jails and prisons, as well as the prevalence of psychiatric breakdown and suicide. Of course, advocates for mental health jails claim that they will focus on treatment, but the sad reality is that with subsequent budget cuts for the treatment most of the prisoners in mental health jails will eventually be warehoused in cells with little to do except taking prescribed medications and attending some groups. Imagine you are alone in a cell that is no bigger than 6 by 8 feet; you have been forced to be alone or conversely. You have a lack of privacy because now you share that cell with another inmate and a correctional officer walks by your cell every 2-4 hours to ensure the accuracy and safety of a prison. You also have very little, to no communication with family and friends and have no access to social networks to keep up with society. Do you feel isolated now? My point here is that even if the convict is granted a lifetime in prison, as opposed to the death penalty, it will drive that person insane and creates room for mental issues. In other words, prisoners begin to go on this emotional rollercoaster with only their thoughts, books to read, limited activities, which they might have no interest in, and maybe even writing to keep them busy throughout the day. How much of that repetitive cycle can you go through a day without starting to become a wreck yourself? No price can be placed on peace of mind, but not having enough access to health services in prisons for those who have mental issues, while being incarcerated can increase the risks of other inmate’s lives, as well as suicide.

Some believe that might have been the case with Warren McClesky who reportedly was convicted of murdering an Atlanta Police Officer. Many had suspicions the case went the way it did because of McCleskey’s race. In McCleskey’s final statement, he said, “I pray that one day this country, supposedly a civilized society will abolish this barbaric act” (Lee) I know you are concerned just as much as I am about whether an innocent person will be unethically blamed for a crime they did not do. Innocence is a form of purity and the good people should not be penalized for a crime that was committed by someone else, I agree. We are only trying to lessen the amount of violence in the United States and punish those who abuse their right to live. “Since 1973, more than 160 people have been released from death row with evidence of their innocence. From 1973-1999, there was an average of three exonerations per year. From 2000-2011, there was an average of five exonerations per year”.

Therefore, when you look at the innocent people who we think are being executed for something they did not do. The justice system works just as hard to save those who are innocent and ensure the courts have enough evidence, so they do not release someone who is a threat to the community. My argument to that would be that very few of those put to death are found innocent after being convicted. There is no real evidence that shows that anyone ever put to death was innocent. I feel there is a fine line when the death penalty should be put into effect. If a serial killer or someone who has committed a cruel homicide is to be put to death then I feel this is justice being served.

Let me give you a different perspective and say in this case rather than the convict getting the death penalty the person who has committed the crime is punished with life sentencing whether it would be a charge for murder, rape, or kidnap. Some individuals are still dangerous even being behind bars, which means they would continue being a threat and harmful to the rest of society while imprisoned. For example, Pablo Escobar. While Pablo Escobar was incarcerated, he was still committing crimes from his luxurious prison he built. When this surfaced officials were prompted to send him to a more conventional jail on July 22, 1992. Every person has the right to live; the only fair punishment is to take away the right to live from the murder themselves. The past plays a big part when dealing with the death penalty. People will ask what good will it do.

If you look in previous cases, it has done very well for the individuals that are no longer here. Men and women were vicious and had no remorse of a victim’s well-being. There are two types of extreme people on death row. There is the extreme where they feel nothing. They have no care or remorse for what they have done to the person or their loved ones. Then there is the other extreme where they were emotionally involved and were very intimate with their victims. These types of people deserve to perish and we must kill them. The criminal gets caught, tried and convicted. It is understood that the punishment will be served, but the victim he has killed has no part to play in his case. He cannot speak on his behalf because he is no longer with us. The killer has deprived his family, friends and loved ones of his presence. Watching him grow and prosper. Their grief has begun with the murder itself. It probably will not end with the murder’s execution, but it does give a sense of relief to the family that the murder is no longer living because the victim is also no longer living. Can we do without the death penalty? I think we can do without homicidal maniacs and rapist that commit cold-blooded murders. The death penalty was built for a certain percentage of individuals that do not deserve to be in society or to even keep living. The death penalty is not just handed out to anyone committing grand theft or fraud. It is a life for a life. If these people cared about their own life, they would not take another’s.

We live in a country where the word freedom is taken advantage of by their citizens and then we have those who might be citizens or immigrants who are appreciative of the life they have in the United States. In other words, we all have a life and we are in control of our decisions, ethical or unethical. The death penalty is here to stop the continuance of violence towards one another and crimes committed that have gone to extreme cases. Therefore, if you ask me, I would argue that capital punishment is effective in getting the results we hoped to achieve and should remain a law for those who have abused their rights. If we praised love, the way society praises hatred; maybe we would all be more united than at war with each other.

Works Cited:

1. Jackson, S. (1948). The lottery. The New Yorker, 26(27), 25-30.
2. Kosenko, P. (1995). A reading of Shirley Jackson's 'The Lottery'. New Orleans Review, 21(1), 27-32.
3. McGlynn, M. (2013). The most dangerous game: The lottery and the logic of mass murder. Journal of American Culture, 36(3), 315-327.
4. Moseley, M., & Byrne, J. (2013). Critical interpretations: Shirley Jackson's 'The Lottery'. Salem Press.
5. Nebeker, H. (1994). 'The Lottery': Symbolic tour de force. American Literature, 46(1), 100-107.
6. Probst, R. E. (1975). The lottery' as response to the Nuremberg trials. Journal of Modern Literature, 4(1), 193-199.
7. Smith, D. (2009). The architecture of cinematic adaptation: The lottery by Shirley Jackson. Literature/Film Quarterly, 37(3), 181-191.
8. Stiles, A. (2002). ‘The Lottery’: Encountering the other. Journal of the Short Story in English, (38), 95-102.
9. Sullivan, W. F. (1963). The motif of the scapegoat in The Lottery. Journal of American Folklore, 76(301), 164-170.
10. Talmadge, E. (2005). The Lottery: Symbolic acts, ritual violence and their relationship to traditional forms of communal authority. New Orleans Review, 31(1), 124-134.