I.
IntroductionDeath Penalty, in law, is the imposition of the death penalty for the commission of a crime. In countries that permit it, murder and treason are usually considered capital crimes (crimes for which the death sentence can be imposed). Other been specified in modern times include kidnapping, rape, air piracy, and espionage. Death Penalty for an offense may be either mandatory (required by the law to be applied upon conviction) or discretionary (left to the jury or the court to decide in passing sentence in individual cases).
Among the methods used to carry out the death sentence are electrocutions, asphyxiation with gas, injection of lethal drugs, hanging, beheading, and shooting (Hurwitt 422).Since ancient times, Death Penalty has been a part of criminal justice systems. The earliest known written provision was in the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi, dated about 1750 B.C. Twenty-five crimes punishable by death were specified.
The purpose of this study is to know the pros and cons of death penalty and understand some grounds why it needs to be abolished.II. BackgroundA. What is death penalty?Death penalty is considered as a capital punishment and is an execution of a convicted offender by the State which serves as chastisement for crimes committed which is recognized and called as capital offenses or capital crimes. Death penalty is the most discussed issue in penalizing or sentencing the convicted criminal.The term “capital” was taken from a Latin word “capitalis” that refers to “concerning the head”; thus, to be susceptible to capital punishment would simply refers to metaphorically lose one’s head.
Moreover, the United States of America, majority of the Caribbean, Guatemala and other democracies in Africa and China continue to have its approval on death penalty but amongst of those democratic nations globally, majority of the European and Latin American states have put an end with the capital punishment.While on countries that are not democratic by nature, the death penalty execution is not unusual yet not practiced by all. There are certain crimes that are specified by laws that need to be sentenced with death penalty depending on countries where the crime committed. Nowadays, most countries that practiced and applied death penalty used it as a punishment for crimes such as treason, part of the military justice, murder and espionage.
But for Muslim countries, death penalty is used as punishment for offenses such as sexual crimes (which include sodomy and adultery) and religious crimes like apostasy (abandonment of one’s faith and belief). There are countries too that considered drug trafficking as a capital offense and in China, serious cases of graft and corruption and human trafficking are sentenced by death penalty. But in the military world, death penalty is practiced for offenses like desertion, mutiny; insubordination and cowardice (Bailey, Harris, & Jones, 97).III. DiscussionA. The Pros and Cons of Capital PunishmentDoes the State have the right and, therefore, the authority to impose capital punishment, that is, to put to death a criminal? Advocates of human rights oppose, including myself, capital punishment as cruel, inhuman, uncivilized, and inconsistent with reason.
Our Constitution may abolish capital punishment, but does not prohibit Congress to impose death penalty for “heinous crimes.” Today, our legislators have yet to define and rule on what constitutes a heinous crime (Meltzer 320).The Pros of Capital Punishment. Just as an individual may invoke self-defense, the State, charged with the care of society, has the right and the power to defend the citizens from criminals. When imprisonment or isolation is not commensurate to the crime, or to the notoriety of the criminal, capital punishment may be imposed as a choice of lesser evil.
The Cons of Capital Punishment. While there are indeed numerous texts from the Scripture supportive of capital punishment, such are not acceptable since “they were written at a time when bloody vengeance was exacted for murder and it was believed that the blood of the victim cried out from the earth until it had been avenged by the blood of the murderer.” “Precisely” Jesus repudiated the law of talion, which demanded an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Instead, Jesus taught us to love our enemies and do well to those who harm us. Although this does not mean that we should not punish at all, for we have seen that punishment can be good and just, it is claim on us to temper the severity of punishment with a mercy which is born of love.
”Another argument advanced is that capital punishment is not the only alternative open for punishing criminals. The alternative is modern societies is imprisonment for life. This imprisonment is a serious deprivation which expresses sufficiently society’s condemnation of willful murder.Capital punishment is a destructive action which needs a special justification, a special pleading. Capital punishment should never be compared with surgery where the intention is the preservation of life and not the extinction of life.
Directly harmful actions which do not bring benefit to one who suffers them are hard to justify. Such is capital punishment for it directly destroys the life of a person, preventing him to make amends and to change his life. Indeed, it is the presumed that the Senate has the duty to rehabilitate criminals.In addition, it may seem strange that it cannot be proved that the death penalty is an effective deterrent, but there are a number of reasons why it may not be. For the death penalty to deter a number of conditions would have to be satisfied. The criminal would have to consider the possible outcome of his crime before committing it.
But many murders are crimes of passion, committed when feelings are running high. Often the murderer does not intend that his criminal activities will end up with a murder. Sometimes at the time of the crime his state of mind is such that he does not care what becomes of him: nothing seems as important as attacking his victim (Laqueur 201).Admitting that there are indeed cases where murderers who have killed again after their release from prison. I do believe that even in these cases the solution is not putting these criminals to death but by intensifying security in prisons.I believe that crimes are the result of socio-environmental conditions.
He declares as his personal conviction “that the State has no right to uphold the death penalty unless it has done all in its power to give better education and to care for a more just and humane environment.”A supreme court that practically forces parents to send their children into an educational system where the teaching of religion and an ethics based on faith is forbidden should not be entitled to endorse the death penalty, for many crimes flow from that very system of education.Religious Aspect of Capital Punishment. God has given to the State the right over life and death, as He has given to every man the right of self-defense against unjust aggression. This moral power of the State has been universally acknowledged in Christian tradition. It is explicitly declared in Scripture to have existed in the Jewish State (Exodus 22, 18); it was recognized in the Roman polity by St.
Paul (Roman 13, 4): “For he (the Prince) is God’s minister to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, fear; for he beareth not the sword in vain.”This would only imply that every person has the right to live without “unjust molestation” from others. Capital punishment is therefore necessary for peace and security of life and property. Capital punishment is a deterrent so that citizens may live and go about their activities without molestation (Hurwitt 450). Nonetheless, there must be conditions on when capital punishment should be applied:1.
The criminal is given “due process” in court;2. The crime imputed to him must be deserving of the highest possible punishment; 3. The guilt of the criminal is sufficiently proved beyond any doubt.B.
Problems Arise due to capital punishmentSince the conception of death penalty, problems regarding such punishment have never ended. The questions start popping up from different walks of life whether death penalty involves racism or not, the risks in executing the innocent and the debates of pro and anti.a.) RacismWhere ever we go, it can not be denied that racism is always on the corner. It is an incurable sickness of humanity unless the individual will let go of his pride and superior complex.The worst scenario is when racism also presents in giving death sentence to a defendant.
Does this “intense penalization” practiced justly regardless to its race? In death penalty situations, the practice of critical and pejorative disgrace stirs up the flames of bias and partiality and to some extent allows the jury to convict insensitively and unsympathetically to those who they wish implicate such punishment (Freedom in the World: Political and Civil Liberties. 116).b.) Risks on executing the innocentAnother problem that arises is the risk of executing an innocent man. We cannot say how many of the 1,000 individuals sentenced with capital punishment since 1976 may possibly innocent.
The courts will not think about and entertain the claims of innocence if the accused is already executed. The defense attorneys of the defendant, who is still alive, will move on other cases to save his/her client from such punishment. An example of case was of Ruben Cantu of Texas. He was convicted in 1985 and executed in 1993.
The accused Ruben Cantu determinedly and insistently claimed that he was innocent from the crime and was 17 years of age when accused with capital murder for killing a man from San Antonio and attempted robbery cases. After the execution, the jury and the prosecutor have shown their doubts regarding the case. In addition, the witness against Cantu and the co-defendant of Cantu have come into conclusion that Cantu was an innocent man (Hurwitt 449). If this scenario continuously happens, it is not surprising why we still have rallies against death penalty.
C. Public opinion polls on the death penaltyIn a survey conducted by Harris poll in 1965, there was approximately 38% of United States poll respondents are pro and supported death penalty while there were about 47% who are against of it. But in 2001, the atmosphere changed. From 38% of death penalty advocates, it increased up to 67% while the anti decreased from 47% down to 26%. But just this year of 2006, there was a great increased on the side of those who believed on death penalty.
A census made by Sam Houston State University discovered that there were approximately 73.4% of respondents countrywide that are in favored on death penalty for individuals charged with murder while for those 20.1% anti-death penalty believed on life imprisonment without parole (Hurwitt 458).III. ConclusionIn conclusion, there are two probable opinions within Christianity and within the Catholic Church regarding the death penalty. We should always remember that every action we do have a consequence, whether it is good or bad.
As I study this issue, I learned that I should not be one sided but be opened for any different views regarding death penalty issue. My views were widened that both pro and anti are having valid reasons why they fight and stand out for their beliefs and principles. But, I have noticed that the more death penalty is practiced, the crime rates increase instead of decreasing. So, as my conclusion, it is better to stop death penalty not because I am against or pro but because the crime rates did not lessen as what others think of.
Moreover, if in case death penalty will not be abolished, I would suggest that the judge must be careful in giving such punishment. They must review the death sentence they have given to the accused to avoid mistakes and spare the lives of the innocence. And for the legislators, they should think-through the laws they make. They should not make laws which are always in favor in their race or color.
