Running head: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT 1
Capital Punishment
Student’s Name
Institution Affiliation
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT 2
Capital Punishment
Introduction
In most of humankind's history, the punishment for committing murder or homicide has
always been the death penalty. During ancient times, the death penalty seemed to be the logical
punishment. The argument then was, if someone kills another innocent person, why should they
continue to live. However, throughout the ages of civilization, capital punishment is one of the
hugely controversial issues. Capital punishment is a legal death penalty that has been issued by
the court due to suspects violating criminal laws.
Over the years, the forms of capital punishment have differed from different countries.
For instance, in some countries, they were hung till death; in other countries, they were shot to
death or were administered a lethal injection. The idea of capital punishment is controversial,
where some argue that it is necessary as it will serve as an example to other criminals and also
act as a retribution process. On the other hand, others say that all life is precious and that having
the culprit locked up is the best punishment. This essay, we shall analyze issues about capital
punishment in historical and modern perspectives.
Discussion
Capital punishment has been one of the most controversial and feared things in the last
four centuries. There is still debate on whether it is unconstitutional to even today. Currently,
there are close to 100 countries that continue to practice the death penalty. In the United States,
the death penalty spurred a lot of debate from politicians, religious leaders, and ordinary citizens,
where many people opposed the practice, which led to a case in the Supreme Court. In 1976, the
United States Supreme Court declared that the death penalty practice did not go against the
Constitution. However, if one reads the Eight Amendment of the US constitution, it prohibits
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT 3
cruel and unusual punishments. Abolitionists in the United States also argue that capital
punishment is a punishment that ensures equality for all Americans.
While some citizens support capital punishment globally, others believe the penalty
should not amount to such a drastic and cruel measure. According to Henningfeld (2006), the
authorized killing of any person is morally wrong, and using this type of punishment should
ensure that there is no room for errors. In the event, there was an error in the investigation, and
the wrong person was punished is found to be innocent, it will be too late for the court to do
anything about it. Due to such reasons, individuals against capital punishment argue that the
death penalty is too much and risky as well.
When most people hear that murder is facing execution due to their criminal actions,
most people would applaud and say that the criminal got what he or she deserved. However, to
some individuals, the death penalty is seen as a cruel and morally wrong act. According to
Henningfeld (2006), the author considers capital punishment to be similar to torture since it
involves a deliberate assault to an inmate. In many aspects of life, individuals are taught that
killing is an immoral act, even when the person in question is a murder. In most religions, they
share a strong belief that indicates the death penalty is a wrong decision. For instance, the
Catholic Church is among the faiths that oppose the deliberate killing of persons, no matter
which crime they have committed (Brugger, 2014).
The position of the Church in regard to capital punishment is the death penalty should be
abolished. According to Overberg (2013), if the people can abolish capital punishment, it will
send a message that the people have the power to break the cycle of violence and that it is wrong
to think that ‘a life for a life,’ is the best solution. From a religious standpoint, the Catholic
Church, in conjunction with other major religious groups, stands for the pro-life. Also, other
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT 4
religions, such as Buddhism strongly believe in a life of compassion and non-violence. In an
article by Anckar (2014), Buddhists believe in refraining from taking the life of any creature,
regardless of the crime committed. By understanding that life is precious, it allows for another
punishment to be created as long as it does not involve taking the life of another.
Religion is not the only group or institution that actively advocates for the abolishing of
capital punishment, the Charter of Rights and Freedom opposes it. According to Ryan (2016),
The Eighth Amendment explains that a perpetrator should not be asked to give excessive bails or
required to face cruel and unusual punishment. From this statement, the author argues that killing
a human for their actions is not tolerated in the Constitution. Other people argue criminals should
be given a chance to mend their ways and take responsibility for their effort by serving time
(Binder et al., 2016). But, if we impose capital punishment on all criminals, the law is portraying
that when a person makes a mistake, it defines your identity, and for this, you cannot be
forgiven. Governments that enforce capital punishment leads its citizens to be primarily focused
on ensuring justice is served to criminals for what they deserve so much, that they end up
forgetting how immoral and appalling taking a human’s life deliberately is.
Usually, when a suspect is convicted of a crime, they are sentenced on the basis that the
court has been able to prove, without any doubt, that the convicted suspect is the one who
committed the unlawful act. Courts are expected to be 100 percent sure that the suspect has
committed the crime he or she has been accused of, to avoid any wrongful convictions. However,
the problem of capital punishment arises when the suspect is sentenced to death, while there is
still room for errors (Sunstein & Vermeule, 2005). If a jury deciding on a case make a wrong
decision in their verdict, which sentenced an innocent person to execution, should that not be
termed as cold-blooded murder?
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT 5
According to Warden, & Lennard (2017), there are several cases where an innocent
person has been wrongfully convicted to death, and then, later on, the evidence is found proving
that the person as innocent. An example of such a case is that of Carlos DeLuna, where he was
sentenced to death only due to circumstantial evidence and a testimony of a witness on what they
thought they saw. With only these facts, Carlos was convicted for fatally stabbing and killing a
certain woman in a parking lot, where no direct evidence was presented in 1983. Carlos was put
to death in 1989, and the case was closed. However, a few years later, reporters discovered that
Carlos DeLuna was innocent and that a man by the name Carlos Hernandez was, in fact, the real
criminal.
The same situation happened in the case of Steven Truscott, who was a boy aged 14.
Truscott was put to death after quite a circumstantial case. In this case, the police ignored to
factor in all the evidence that shed light on his innocence and focused their attention on that
would make Truscott appear guilty. Truscott was lucky that the death penalty was abolished
before his execution. However, he had spent half of his life in prison from a crime he did not
commit, only to have his case reopened, which revealed that Truscott was innocent all along.
Looking at this case, if it were not for the abolishment of the death penalty, the innocent boy
would have been executed for the failure of the court to make the right judgment (Sahni &
Junnarkar (2020).
From the above-presented cases, it is evident that capital punishment has too many errors
for the system to be considered an effective way of giving victims a form of retribution. In an
article by Baumgartner et al. (2014), the state of Illinois has halted the death penalty after it was
discovered that approximately 52 percent of their death row inmates were completely innocent.
These shocking statistics indicate that more than half of the prisoners executed were innocent.
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT 6
The findings on Illinois death row inmates are shocking and heartbreaking at the same time.
When one begins to fathom the number of prisoners that were executed, yet they were innocent,
there is no doubt that a lot of errors were made in the capital punishment cases, which have
resulted in the death of innocent people.
The Church firmly believes that all humans are created in the image of God. For this
reason, every human life holds significant value, dignity, and worth, which every person,
regardless of their position in society, ought to uphold and protect at all times. The Church is
passionate in its defense of the sanctity of life, and this includes the lives of criminals. The
Catholic Church affirms that human life is precious, including those that harm or violate the
rights of others. For this reason, the death penalty violates the Church’s beliefs. A victim of the
Church is Pope John Paul II, who survived an assassination attempt by use of a firearm, the Pope
was lucky to survive, but he never recovered from the gun wounds. However, the Pope spoke of
forgiveness and made an example of the attack. Pope John Paul II also asked for the abolition of
capital punishment in his situation. Pope’s message from the incident is that ‘the answer to
violence is not violence.’
Conclusion
In conclusion, the controversy of capital punishment has been going on for decades.
While one side of the debate seeks retribution, the other advocates for life and reforms, in light
of the evidence presented in this essay, capital punishment is wrong and should never be
reinstated. The practice is morally wrong and goes against religious values and teachings. Capital
punishment also denies the suspects a chance to prove their innocence; in the event, one is
innocent.
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT 7
References
Anckar, C. (2014). Why countries choose the death penalty. The Brown Journal of World
Affairs, 21(1), 7-25.
Baumgartner, F. R., Westervelt, S. D., & Cook, K. J. (2014). Public policy responses to wrongful
convictions. Examining wrongful convictions: Stepping back, moving forward, 251-266.
Binder, G., Fissell, B., & Weisberg, R. (2016). Capital punishment of unintentional felony
murder. Notre Dame L. Rev., 92, 1141.
Brugger, E. C. (2014). Capital punishment and Roman Catholic moral tradition. University of
Notre Dame Press.
Henningfeld, D. A. (2006). The Death Penalty: Opposing Viewpoints. Greenhaven Press.
Overberg, K. R. (2013). The consistent ethic of life: Putting morality and spirituality into
practice. New Theology Review, 19(1).
Ryan, M. J. (2016). Taking dignity seriously: Excavating the backdrop of the eighth amendment.
U. Ill. L. Rev., 2129.
Sahni, S. P., & Junnarkar, M. (2020). Public Opinion on Death Penalty. In The Death Penalty
(pp. 55-75). Springer, Singapore.
Sunstein, C. R., & Vermeule, A. (2005). Is Capital Punishment Morally Required-Acts,
Omissions, and Life-Life Tradeoffs. Stan. L. Rev., 58, 703.
Warden, R., & Lennard, D. (2017). Death in America Under Color of Law: Our Long, Inglorious
Experience with Capital Punishment. Nw. JL & Soc. Pol'y, 13, 194.
