Touchstone 4 ( English )

Death penalty is unethical. The immorality of the death penalty can be justified through its harm and its ability to violate human rights as well as society obligations to people’s well-being. International law does not prohibit capital punishment but most people consider the death penalty as a violation of human rights, which is immoral. From a religious perspective, many religious scholars from major world religions such as Islam, Christianity, Buddhism and Hinduism, have pointed their varying views on their faith’s perspective on death penalty. In the past, the death penalty was a preferred punishment for crimes considered serious in multiple religious histories and was widely practiced in religious hierarchies. But today, there is no agreement among major religions on the morality of the death penalty. However, some of these religious groups have demonstrated their concerns for the death penalty in contrast to their beliefs and pointed their concerns on the morality of the punishment and its application. For example, Christian believe that only God has the right to take life since He is the one who provided it in the first place. Therefore, the death sentence means going against God, which is immoral. Comment by Eackloff, Robyn: You establish the background information. Comment by Eackloff, Robyn: Please include citation.

Societal moral obligation grounds, the society has the duty to protect the life of its members including their well-being and welfare. The use of death penalty breaches two essential human rights, the right to life and the right to live free from any torture. Taking a human life is not only denying the accused their right to live but also goes against the community’s obligation to refrain from killing or taking one’s life. Well, punishment is supposed to be used only to attain the greatest good over the evil for all involved stakeholders. Thus, executing a person also affects the family members, especially if it is racial bias. Given the value society places on human life and the societal obligations of minimizing human pain and suffering, using a less painful alternative such as life imprisonment without parole, which can accomplish the same goal as the death penalty would be significant. Moreover, society today is unequal, therefore “death penalty can be misused to target political opponents and specific groups,” (Olalere, S. (2019). For instance, according to the ACLU, in the United State, a colored person is more likely to be executed compared to white individual, especially if the victim is a white (ACLU (2012). Therefore, the ethical or morality of having the death penalty in the law or practice should be considered, taking into account religious perspective on life preservation and societal obligations and duties on human life. Comment by Eackloff, Robyn: When moving from one paragraph to another, please remember to use transition words or phrases. This will help with the flow of the essay. Comment by Eackloff, Robyn: This is a good call to action.

Death penalty is also expensive compared to the cost of upkeep for a person living in prison without parole. Many people believe that by executing a criminal, the state saves money because the executed individual no longer needs health care, confinements and other prison related expenses. However, given the procedures and applications of the death penalty today, this punishment has proven to be more expensive compared to other systems such as using life-without paroles as an alternative punishment. Well, according to experts, “the average federal prisoner costs about $37,500 per year compared to a death row prisoner, which would cost about $60,000 to $70,000 per year,” (Perez (2022). This is double or more of the cost required for life prison. Well, death penalty is expensive because it requires various trials, which can last for decades, legal cost, the incarceration cost, appeal, which can be costly, pre-trial cost and the jury selections, which are not only expensive but time consuming ((DPIC report (2022). Given that the imposing of death sentence will most likely result in case overturning in court, the need for more experts and lawyers for both the victim and the criminal including the relative execution rarity, will be required. Clearly, the death penalty imposes a higher net cost of the stakeholders involved compared to life imprisonment without parole. Therefore, are the assumed advantages of this punishment worth its costs and financial burden it can impose on the victim or the criminal’s family. Comment by Eackloff, Robyn: Good summation. Comment by Eackloff, Robyn: What are the implications of this in regards to the argument?

Death penalty is also irreversible in case of any error in the criminal justice system. Unlike other types of punishment, execution of an innocent person is not reversible. An increasing amount of modern evidence shows that many innocent people often get convicted of crimes they did not commit including capital crimes and some of them get executed. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, while looking at several death penalty cases “ for cases whose outcomes are known, an astonishing 82% of retried death row inmates turned out not to deserve the death penalty; 7% were not guilty,” (Liebman, J., 2022). Research shows there is a higher rate of error in countries such as the United States when it comes to criminal justices, where many accused people face outcomes of tainted evidence and poorly investigated crime cases. Many factors contribute to errors in capital cases such as police misconduct, eyewitness fault, botched crime scenes, destruction of evidence or bad representation by inexperienced attorneys as well as misconduct from the prosecution. Comment by Eackloff, Robyn: Please provide more supporting evidence, with citation.

In case, an individual is executed and evidence is revealed in the future, which could change the investigation's outcome, it has no use because the innocent person cannot be brought back. The death penalty mainly affects certain groups such as the poor and the people of color, especially in countries such as the United States. Information from DPIC shows that black people or black mixed are overrepresented in death sentences. In addition, The United Nation Human Rights Council also states that, people who are poor are more lucky to receive a death sentence compared to the upper class individuals. According to Morris, “Race is a particularly strong determinant: As of April 2020, Black people made up more than 41 percent of those on death row but only 13.4 percent of the U.S. population,” (Morris, P. (2021). These groups are unable to afford a good lawyer, they are an easy target for both the police and criminal justice as well as the public legal counselors provided for them are mostly inferior, increasing the rate of errors. Comment by Eackloff, Robyn: Please include a citation for this claim.

Life imprisonment without parole is both a sensible and better alternative to capital punishment, given the benefits it offers. Life imprisonment means locking away the criminal until they die. Unlike the death sentence, life imprisonment allows new evidence or any mistakes during the investigations to be corrected. For instance, if a person is accused falsely, while they are serving their punishment in prison, a new evidence, which might have been hidden or any mistakes such as identity mistakes can be used to set the free. Life imprisonment also costs less and the money used in executing an individual can be channeled to other significant programs, which are more effective in deterring crime. For instance, crime prevention programs such as Community Youth Development programs, mental health services, drug treatment centers, polices forces and other community programs. As such, life imprisonment is harsh, it offers a degree of protection to the society from any future serious violence from offenders without taking any life and spending much (Bagaric, M., & Svilar, J. (2021). This can be used as a death penalty alternative given its benefits. Comment by Eackloff, Robyn: A compelling statistic would strengthen the argument. Comment by Eackloff, Robyn: Please remove the author’s first initial for each citation.

Death penalty is supported by many people because it is believed to deter murder crimes in society. This type of punishment can affect a certain percentage of people who commit murder in society. It can most apply if a member of a certain criminal group is executed for committing a serious crime such as murder. However, there is no evidence that supports the claim that this punishment is more effective in deterring murder and other serious crimes in the community (Death penalty information center (2022). In fact, various studies have compared the rate of murder and other serious crimes with and without capital punishment and shown that the rate of committing serious crimes are not related to whether the death sentence is enforced or not. Moreover, this argument could narrowly be defend only for the murder crimes but not for other serious crimes subjected to death penalty such as treason, rape and kidnapping. In addition, “Persons who commit murder and other crimes of personal violence often do not premeditate their crimes,” (ACLU (2012). Many serious crimes are committed during moments of psychological or emotional stress as well as the influence of serious drugs or even alcohol. During these moments, an individual's logical thinking is mostly suspended, thus they are more likely to commit capital crimes. Other people also claim that criminals commit capital crimes, through their action, they forfeit human rights, and therefore their right to life should be forfeit too. This might be a good alternative but it violets the moral order. Taking the death penalty as morally justified by the significant aims it serves such as deterrence and by using theories such as Forfeited rights theory do not make a punishment acceptable. However, it is important to consider societal obligations and duties while balancing the good over the evil within the society. Comment by Eackloff, Robyn: You provide a counterargument with an appropriate rebuttal.

In conclusion, the death penalty is not only unethical but also costly and cannot be reversed in case of any error during investigation. Thus, using life imprisonment without any parole is a better alternative to the death penalty because it is less costly and most importantly gives time for more investigations or new evidence. The deterrent ability of the death penalty is not proven, therefore, it is important to research and consider impacts of this punishment to the society and find a better alternative. Comment by Eackloff, Robyn: You appropriately restate the thesis in the conclusion.

Reference