Kill the Death Penalty: 10 Arguments Against Capital Punishment

DAN BROOK

July 15, 2014

We need to kill  the death penalty, not people. Here are 10 reasons why, any one of which could be enough.

1) Democracy. The death penalty is totalitarian. I don’t want anyone killed in my name, in our name. When the government prosecutes, convicts, sentences, and executes defendants, we the people are the plaintiff. Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel famously said that in a democracy, not all are at fault, but everyone is responsible. The current system enforces that we citizens are co-responsible for our fellow citizens’ state-sanctioned murder, which is more akin to fascism than democracy. I dissent.

2) Barbarism. The death penalty is barbaric and an antiquated, regressive, “cruel and unusual” punishment. With all of our advances in the sciences, sociology, psychology, education, technology, and so on, we should have more socially-effective, non-lethal, civilized techniques to punish (and rehabilitate) criminals, while protecting the rest of society. Professor Austin Sarat estimates that “executions by lethal injection are botched at a higher rate than any of the other methods employed since the late 19th century, 7 percent.”

3) Cost. The death penalty is quite expensive and life imprisonment can be cheaper. Over the lifetime of a case, executing prisoners can be three times as expensive as life in prison, primarily due to the higher costs of capital punishment trials, automatic appeals, and the heightened security on death row with lower staff-to-prisoner ratios. Commuting all death sentences to life in prison would save hundreds of millions of dollars per year in the U.S. and many billions over the coming decades.

4) Deterrence. The death penalty doesn’t have a deterrent factor and doesn’t decrease crime. States with the death penalty do not have lower homicide rates. Many criminals don’t get caught, most criminals don’t receive the death penalty, and those who do are typically on death row for a long time, often at least a decade and sometimes more, so would-be criminals don’t typically make a connection between their crime and capital punishment. We cannot conclude that the death penalty has any deterrent effect on crime, including murder.

5) Brutalization Effect. The death penalty is brutal on society. The brutalization effect suggests that when violence is condoned via the death penalty, more violence occurs. Homicide rates tend to increase around the time of executions, due to legitimation, desensitization, and imitation. The death penalty makes society more dangerous by further increasing violence through the brutalization effect.

6) Civilization. The death penalty is uncivilized. Civilized countries have banned the death penalty as have 18 U.S. states, while the governments that maintain the death penalty are typically more corrupt and dictatorial ones (e.g., China, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Yemen; in the U.S., Texas leads in applying the death penalty by far, accounting for over 1/3 of U.S. executions). The U.S., as the only remaining Western country to regularly administer the death penalty, is in very bad company and the world knows it, even if many Americans don't, which decreases the legitimacy of the U.S. on human rights issues

7) Innocence. Innocent people are on death row and innocent people have been put to death. These are irreversible tragedies. A recent study concludes that 4% of people on death row in America are not guilty. Since 1973, 144 prisoners on death row have been found to be innocent of the crimes for which they were convicted. The Death Penalty Information Centre strongly suspects that ten prisoners who were put to death were wrongly accused and killed.

8) Racism. The death penalty is racist and has been applied in racially-discriminatory ways. African American men are disproportionately sentenced to death. Prosecutors, juries, and judges are much more likely to apply the death penalty when the victim is white and the defendant is black. Race is a “potent influence” at every step in the criminal (in)justice system, including search, arrest, indictment, trial, conviction, sentence, and execution.

9) Humanity. The death penalty is inhumane. Killing people makes us like the murderers who most of us so despise. It is not only about what capital punishment does to those killed, but also what it does to those who do the killing and those in whose name the killing is done. It’s bad enough that we are victimized by crime in our society; we don’t need to be further victimized by by becoming perpetrators and enacting the death penalty and then living with the unfortunate consequences.

10) Social Change. The tide is turning against the death penalty. Increasingly, countries and states are banning the death penalty; drug companies are refusing to allow their products to be used for capital punishment; the U.S. is executing fewer people; and public support for the death penalty is waning. Decreased crime rates, changes in sentencing guidelines, diminishing support, and demographics (the young and people of color are much less likely to support the death penalty) are all leading toward less capital punishment and its ultimate abolition.

There are also personal, political, religious, and spiritual reasons to oppose capital punishment. The sooner we kill the death penalty, the better it’ll be. Let’s not wait any longer.

---

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

I take exception to a few of Mr Ph.D., Dan's points.

This one in particular:

4) Deterrence. The death penalty doesn’t have a deterrent factor and doesn’t decrease crime. 

I think it's safe to say that there has never been a repeat offender from the ranks of the executed.

LOL

I don't know how long it will take China to catch up to more civilized nations, but America considers itself a civilized nation, still practising capital punishment, so it would be hypocritical to criticize China for what it does itself.

China is the world’s most prolific executioner.

Could be, but nobody can say for sure.  China also has the world's most numerous population, so rates rather than total numbers would be most accurate.

I connect with a lot of this. I'm not a fan of the death penalty myself. But not all the arguments are strong ones, and most are just emotional. Some others:

The death penalty is quite expensive and life imprisonment can be cheaper.

Honestly this doesn't seem inevitable. I think we have allowed being on death row to become expensive, but it doesn't need to be. If cost is really the issue, I am sure we can find ways to do it cheaper.

The death penalty doesn’t have a deterrent factor and doesn’t decrease crime.

This is true, but it can be said of all crime. The severity of punishments, in general, functions poorly as a deterrent. What tends to actually deter crime is the certainty of being caught and punished. People are far more likely to commit crime if they think they won't get caught, or will cut a deal if they do get caught. 

So, an example of certainty is mandatory sentencing enhancements - notably, using a gun to commit the crime, which can automatically extend sentences or turn a few months in county jail into a stint at state prison, or turn an ordinary conviction into a strike for 3-strikes laws. There is often no room for judicial - or even prosecutorial - discretion, and criminals know this. This doesn't stop the crime, but it does influence perpetrators to commit assault, robbery, or burglary, for example, without a firearm.

The death penalty is racist

No it isn't. People are racist. The penalty is what it is.

Innocent people are on death row and innocent people have been put to death. These are irreversible tragedies.

This is actually a strong argument. The nature of our adversarial system is that defense attorneys will sometimes get criminals acquitted. People are critical of that, and I understand the sentiment. But the flip side is that prosecutors will put innocent people behind bars. Society seems to be able to live with that, and part of the reason may be that it can be corrected. But you can't undo the execution of an innocent man.

Not mentioned: I believe the real reason we have the death penalty is revenge. We talk of somewhat more refined motivations like deterrence and public safety, but the death penalty is really just the government expressing the outrage of the people. We can talk about whether or not that should be happening, but right now, we don't even admit it to ourselves as a society.

Good analysis - you make sensible points.

Evening..hmm disagree abolishing the death sentence for extreme circumstances..

For mass murderers like our Port Arthur maggot Martin Bryant and the Aussie mass murderer in New Zealand they should have been exterminated years ago... that is 100% undeniable proof with absolutely no doubt what so ever of their crimes..to shoot children in the face while pleading for their lives is beyond words...

They should no longer be walking this earth..I would be happy to pay for the bullets, power bill, or go green and use a rope...

25 years for deliberately taking someone elses life by cold stone murder, you should forfeit your own. 

What is civilised??? Can't think of any country that fits that category 100%...

"25 years for deliberately taking someone elses life by cold stone murder, you should forfeit your own."

Hopefully, what you meant to say was "...they should forfeit their own."  The worst offence I've ever committed (and was guilty of) was speeding 20km over the limit on an empty highway.

I will let you off...you beat me by 13ks and I appealed and got off that one..

First offence and didn't lose any demerit points... plus I was on the wrong highway and lost..

I was referring to the perpetrator..not you personally...

What if the government commits mass murder...who should be held responsible?

I am against the death penalty mostly because I don't trust the Government or the Government workers. It's also very expensive because of the appeals, it's cheaper to keep them locked up for life. I think it should be made elective, if a prisoner wants to die we could facilitate that request (we'd probably end up executing five times as many criminals under that system). If I were executed I'd prefer Televised Firing Squad.

I think it should be made elective, if a prisoner wants to die

Interesting, I guess I am meaner.  I say if the prisoner wants to die he should live out his days rotting in a prison.  I also think the family of the victim should have a large input into what they want in order to help them with whatever closure they are hoping for.

If some savage sicko rapes, brutalizes, and kills my wife, child, or another family member in front of me, would I want that person to get the death penalty? Damn right I would! An eye for an eye is definitely applicable there. And as expeditiously as possible. Don't waste taxpayer dollars keeping them alive, housed, and fed on death row for years waiting on endless appeals. Death by firing squad is the way to go as it is inexpensive ang quick.

Death by firing squad is the way to go

I would reserve the death penalty for rare cases, but this would be the method.

For crying out loud: @#!`Whose car was 'totaled' in the commission of this act?!  And, shall the government be "responsible party" to pay for the damages and repairs to the vehicle? (Smarter minds would like answers!)

I do not like indiscriminate (all of it is) vigilante or "rage" justice on the streets of our country. Actually, our one commits his or her first 'rage' killing. . . more (others) may follow after quickly.

I can't open what you posted but my opinion is that there isn't much likelihood of a method screwing up, like with lethal injection, or bullets missing, or torture as in The Green Mile, if the guillotine were used - there is a kind of instant finality to it, and who knows, maybe it could provoke something literary, like: "It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to than I have ever known."

It is a video of Elliot Ness throwing Frank Nitti off a roof in the movie The Untouchables. 

I guess the efficacy of that method would depend on a number of things - how far off the ground was it?  What if he fell into something that softened the blow?  I think China uses a bullet in the back of one's head - not much chance of missing.

If the person has been found guilty of a heinous enough crime to be sentenced to death the method of execution doesn't particularly matter as long as it happens

There are people that we just don't need to keep around

I have a odd question (in the space age): How come it is so hard to stop a heart from beating with a legal "cocktail" of drugs? I mean, it is not like states have to do this every day! "Expired drug". . . who is kidding whom? We have drugs in drug stores pervasive everywhere. . . literally.

It seems to me that where there is a will there is a way, and the way "apparent" is some people want to go the 'revenge' route to killing and so the 'options' menu is nothing more than the process of getting to "Yes" as a means of ending the debate.

Therefore, I say no to FALSE CHOICES South Carolina: Shame on you! Stop playing silly "incomplete" logic games and if you insist on doing it this way-admit it is to just a bunch of politicians sitting around looking for the means to get their way by hook or crook!

And if firing squads were deemed "cruel and unusual" before (?) . . . okay, maybe just "unadvanced," then, what the heaven is going back to it going to make South Carolina look like to "advanced" people? (HINT: Regressive and Blood-lusting.)

the state's inability to procure lethal injection drugs

I don't understand that. They can put millions of dogs to sleep, but not a handful of people?

Long drop with short rope and properly placed  knot on noose. Problem solved with no mess, no muss, no fuss.