There have been over 55,000 homicides committed in California since the death penalty was re established. This is the equivalent of killing every citizen in the towns of Carlsbad, Ca. or the town of Pensacola, Fla. There have been over 467,000 homicides committed in the United States since the U.S. Supreme court allowed executions in 1976 up to 1994. This relates to the fact that every hour in the United States 2.8 people will be a victim to a homicide. If you have 4 people at your dinner table tonight it could mean that tomorrow night 3 won't be there (Internet Resource Unable to Find URL).

THE RISK OF EXECUTING THE INNOCENT

As for the much heated argument of the penal system accidentally executing an innocent person, I must point out that in this imperfect world, citizens are required to take certain risks in exchange for relative safety. Convicted murderers have taken far more innocent lives than the supposedly 23 innocents mistakenly executed this century. For instance, released and paroled criminals murder up to 13,000 American citizens each year. These are the serious flaws in life sentences that abolitionists prefer to trivialize to nonexistence.

Some might ask: "What if it were YOU who were to be wrongfully executed for a crime you didn't commit?" (This is where I'm supposed to be seized by paranoid terror.)

To answer that question, I would have to consider which is more important to me, my personal safety, or the common good. Common decency and ethics demand that I place the common good far above my personal safety. Therefore, I am morally obligated to take that risk. To do otherwise would be selfish of me, not to mention cowardly.

Also, the death penalty isn't the only institution that requires that we accept risks in exchange for social benefits. We, in fact, mindlessly use far more dangerous institutions that take the lives of innocents by the hundreds every day, like the three or four tons of lethal metal we call automobiles for example. After all, how can we accept the average 45,000 person a year death toll in this nation due to car wrecks for our personal conveniences when we can't accept the few risks of wrongful executions for the sake of defending public safety? Following the lines of that logic, we not only would have to sacrifice our vehicles, we would have to sacrifice the personal conveniences of using electricity and fire because of the lives they cost by accidents. We would have to go back to living in caves like Neanderthals because of our fear of taking risks for social benefits. Indeed, we accept and use far too many devices and institutions that kill far too many hundreds of innocents each and every day to justify focusing this much paranoia on the slimmest and unlikely of risks. To enjoy the privilege of using cars, airplanes, or any other device that improve the quality of our lives, we accept the risks and deaths that are caused by them completely in order to reap their full benefits. The same concept applies for the death penalty only on a far lesser scale. As long as we're entitled to recklessly endanger hundreds of innocent lives daily for our personal conveniences, then surely we should be allowed to take on lesser risks for something far less selfish and self-serving like public safety. Every institution that is of great benefit to society always contains risks so that we may enjoy a better world. The death penalty happens to be the least dangerous of them, yet it is focused on with the most paranoia. Such an attitude is completely irrational.

THE DETERRENT EFFECT OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND HISTORIC PROOF

One argument states that the death penalty does not deter murder. Dismissing capital punishment on that basis requires us to eliminate all prisons as well because they do not seem to be any more effective in the deterrence of crime.

It is said that states that do have the death penalty have higher crime rates than those that don't, that a more severe punishment only inspires more severe crimes. I must point out that every state in the union is different. These differences include the populations, number of cities, and yes, and the crime rates. Strongly urbanized states are more likely to have higher crime rates than states that are more rural, such as those that lack capital punishment. The states that have capital punishment have it because of their high crime rate, not the other way around.

"If we execute murderers and there is in fact no deterrent effect, we have killed a bunch of murderers. If we fail to execute murderers, and doing so would in fact have deterred other murders, we have allowed the killing of a bunch of innocent victims. I would much rather risk the former. This, to me, is not a tough call."

John McAdams - Marquette University/Department of Political Science, on deterrence

The incapacitation effect saves lives - that is to say, that by executing murderers you prevent them from murdering again and do, thus, save innocent life. The evidence of this is decisive and unquestionable. Additionally, the individual deterrent effect also proves that executions save innocent life. This effect represents those prospective murderers who did not murder under specific circumstances because of their fear of execution. There are many, perhaps thousands, of such documented cases, representing many innocent lives saved by the fear of execution. Circumstances dictate that the majority of these cases will never be documented and that the number of innocent lives saved by individual deterrence will be, and has been, much greater than we will ever be able to calculate. Finally, there are more than 30 years of respected academic studies that reveal a general, or systemic, deterrent effect, meaning that there is statistical proof that executions produce fewer murders (Sharp Sec.B).

There are many examples of how the death penalty deters murder; most haven't even been listed on this paper. But here is an example of how the use of consistent executions has dramatically improved certain societies.

In the 1800s, in English occupied India, there was one of the worst gangs of murdering thieves the world has ever known, the Indian hoodlum band known as the Thuggees. Through the course of their existence, dating back to the 1550s, the Thuggees were credited with murdering more than 2,000,000 people, mostly wealthy travelers. The killer secret society plagued India for more than 350 years. The Thuggees traveled in gangs, sometimes disguised as poor beggars or religious mendicants. Sometimes they wore the garb of rich merchants to get closer to unsuspecting victims. One of their principles was never to spill blood, so they always strangled their victims. Each member was required to kill at least once a year in order to maintain membership in the cult. But they killed in the name of religion. The deaths were conceived of as human sacrifices to Kali, the bloodthirsty Hindustani goddess of destruction. It came to pass that the Thuggees began to kill using pickaxes and knives. According to legend, the Thuggees believed that Kali devoured the bodies of their victims. The story goes that once a member of the society hid behind a tree in order to spy on the goddess. The angry goddess punished the Thuggees by making them bury their victims from then on.

The ruling British government worked very hard to stop the Thuggee religion and its murderous practices. Between 1829 and 1848, the British managed to suppress the Thuggees by means of mass arrests and speedy executions. Indeed, rows and rows of Thuggees were left hanging from the gallows along the roads by the dozens. This not only established a zero recidivism rate, but it also greatly discouraged new membership into the cult. The most lethal practitioner of the cult of Thuggee was Buhram. At his trial it was established that he had murdered 931 people between 1790 and 1840. All had been strangled with his waistcloth. Burham was executed in 1840. Appropriately enough, he was hanged until he strangled. In 1882, the British government deemed the problem solved with the hanging death of the last known Thuggee. Good riddance.

Back then, the British weren't as morally confused as they are now. Not only had they the insight to tell the difference between crime and punishment, but they also respected their moral responsibility to defend public safety by diligently countering barbarism, even in their colonies. If the British were anything back then like they are now, they would have been content to sit around on their hands reveling on how "civilized" they are to allow such and evil cult like the Thuggees to exist and terrorize the public. -gladly sacrificing public safety and social tranquility for some self-absorbed sense of delicacy. Most likely, the Thuggees would still be around today and for many centuries more to plague India. The Indians have a lot to be thankful for since the British eliminated that scourge over a century ago. They wouldn't have the nerve to effectively counter such barbarism these days (Roy 121-142).

HISTORICAL TRENDS OF CAPTIAL PUNISMENT

Looking at the long evolution of the death penalty one can see four consistent trends. First is the remarkable decline in the number and types of crimes punishable by death. For a period of 150 years (until the death of George III in 1820) there were more than 200 crimes that were punishable by death (Costanzo 13). In most countries the list of capital crimes kept getting smaller and smaller until the death penalty was erased from the law of the land. Second trend is the attempt to reduce the cruelty of the executions by replacing one system with another more “humane” technology. Former President of the United States Ronald Regan used an analogy to suggest that lethal injection might produce a quick, painless death to condemned prisoners:

I know what it’s like to try to eliminate an injured horse by shooting him. Now you call the veterinarian and he gives it a shot and the horse goes to sleep - that’s it. I myself have wondered…if there aren’t even more human methods now-the simple shot or tranquillizer (14).

In the 1800s the most frequent means of execution was by hanging. It was later replaced by electrocution and then by lethal gas, and most recently lethal injection. The third trend has been the attempt by policy makers to make sure that the death sentences are imposed reasonably and rationally. To make imposition of the death penalty fairer the courts and legislatures have enacted mandatory death sentences for specified crimes, forbidden the practice of mandatory death sentences, broadened and narrowed the sentencing discretion of jurors. These efforts however failed to produce a fair and rational system of capital punishment. And the fourth trend involves “sanitizing” the executions. In the 1700s and early 1800s execution were almost always public events witnessed by hundreds or thousands of unruly spectators. Today executions are carried out late at night using well-defined specialized procedures and witnessed by a handful of people like journalists, family of the victim and family of the condemned, and occur on average eight years and five months after conviction (15).

THE COST OF LWOP VS THE DEATH PENALTY

Why should the taxpayers have to pay to keep this guy alive in prison for the rest of his life?

-Juror in capital murder trial

One of the disagreements about the death penalty is money. Although a purely economic analysis might be considered vulgar or irrelevant to discussion of the life or death issue, the financial cost assertions often emerge in many debates about the death penalty.

In centuries past, people found guilty of capital crimes were escorted to the gallows within a few days of conviction. Computation was swift and cheap. The cost of the death penalty was a small fee paid to the executioner plus the cost of building a gallows. Many thing have changed as the American society evolved, our system of capital punishment has been reshaped by concerns about morality, fairness, consistency, and the possibility of wrongful conviction. Because of this the death penalty is no longer swift or cheap (Costanzo 59). The cost of LWOP (Life With Out Parole) –the alternative to a death sentence- is very high. A full accounting of the cost of LWOP must include the financing, construction, and operation costs of a maximum-security cell. The annualized costs of building and operating such a cell are approximately $5,000.00, and the cost of maintaining a maximum-security prisoner is approximately $ 20,000.00 per year. Life without parole prisoners face, on average, 30 or 40 years in prison, plus the average life expectancy and average age (30.8) the estimated total cost for LWOP ranges from $750,00.00 to 1.1 million dollars per prisoner (60). Take a look ant these figures from the U.S. Vital Statistics Abstract, 1994 and Capital Punishment 1995, Bureau of Justice Statistics 1996

Cost of Life Without Parole Cases Equivalent To Death Penalty Cases:

$34,200/year for 50 years at a 2% annual cost increase, plus $75,000 for trial & appeals = $3.01 million (at a 3% increase = 4.04 million and a 4% increase = 5.53 million)

Cost of Death Penalty Cases:

$60,000/year (1) for 6 years, at a 2% annual cost increase, plus $1.5 million for trial & appeals = 1.88 million (at a 3% increase = 1.89 million and a 4% increase = 1.91 million) (Sharp Sec D).

So the death penalty costs reside mainly in appeals costs. Life without parole prisoners get the same appeals and should be considered to bear the same costs. Lastly, the cost for justice does not have to be so high for the execution of murderers. If we only allowed appeals that are relevant in proving one's innocence and eliminated the many more that are used merely as delaying tactics, it would save millions in taxpayer dollars.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND CHRISTIANITY

Another weapon used to fight capital punishment is the Holy Bible, the source of all morality. Some Christians claim that we have no right to play God by pointing out the 6th commandment in Exodus 20:13, which states: "Thou shall not kill" But if one translated directly from the original Hebrew version, it is: "Thou shall not MURDER." And murder is defined in any dictionary as the UNLAWFUL killing of a person with malice and aforethought.

Many Christians would claim that Jesus changed or abolished the old law and directly opposed the death penalty when he saved a prostitute from being stoned by saying, "Let he among you who is without sin, cast the first stone." John 8:7 and when he said, "Judge not, that you be not judged." Matthew 7:1. But Jesus himself told us that He did not come to abolish or change the Law, but to fulfill the Law:

"Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. for assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”

Matthew 5:17-19

So what has happened is that people have taken those quotations out of context and changed their meaning to suit their own personal views. Abolitionists use what Jesus said in Matthew 7:1, "Judge not, that you be not judged" to say that the death penalty contradicts Christian values since we have to judge to sentence someone to death. But look at the whole picture of what Jesus was saying:

"Judge not, that you be judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you. And why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove the speck from your eye'; and look, a plank is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye"

Matthew 7:1-5

So by seeing the entire picture, we see that Jesus was speaking to the hypocrite. For example, if I steal, and I see someone else stealing, I cannot judge them for stealing. I would be a hypocrite. First, I myself must stop stealing before I could judge the other person. That is called judging fairly and not hypocritically. That is what Jesus meant when He stopped the stoning of the prostitute from an angry mob, discouraging mob rule. Therefore, Jesus left justice and retribution to the civil authorities which was named God's minister for his wrath in Romans 13:4. So Christians should adopt the habit of taking the entire scope of the Bible into account when they interpret certain passages lest they make it look like a pack of hypocritical contradictions.

The affects of instituting the death penalty far out weigh the negative point of its opposition. The elimination of dangerous criminals is far more beneficial to society as a whole. My view is that we must not be selfish in an increasingly selfish society. We must consider the “common good” before we worry about personal well-being. Society’s view on such issues as car wreck fatalities, problems with electricity needs to be consistent in the rational of which is more important the “society as a whole or individual need. In conclusion, the death penalty DOES deter criminals. The facts are in and the #’s speak for themselves. THE DEATH PENALTY WORKS!!!

Bibliography

Works Cited

Bureau of Justice Statistics. 11 Nov. 2000 U.S. Department of Justice. 23 June 2000 .

Capital Punishment 1998. 11 Nov. 2000 U.S. Department of Justice. 17 Dec. 1999 .

A Look at the Death Penalty by Jurisdiction. 15 Nov. 2000 Court TV Online.

.

Hinman, Lawrence M. The Death Penalty. 15 Nov. 2000 A Survey of Selected Philosophical Literature on Punishment and the Death Penalty. 12 July 2000

.

Costanzo, Mark. Just Revenge: Costs and Consequences of the Death Penalty.

New York: St. Martin's Press, 1997

Roy, Parama. Discovering India, Imagining Thuggee. The Yale Journal of Criticism.

1 Sept. 1996 121-145. .

Sharp, Dudley. DEATH PENALTY AND SENTENCING INFORMATION. 20 Nov. 2000 Pro Death Penalty.Com.15 Nov. 2000 .

Metzger, Bruce M. , and Roland E. Murphy, eds.

The New Oxford Annotated Bible. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991, 1994

Works Cited

Bureau of Justice Statistics. 11 Nov. 2000 U.S. Department of Justice. 23 June 2000 .

Capital Punishment 1998. 11 Nov. 2000 U.S. Department of Justice. 17 Dec. 1999 .

A Look at the Death Penalty by Jurisdiction. 15 Nov. 2000 Court TV Online.

.

Hinman, Lawrence M. The Death Penalty. 15 Nov. 2000 A Survey of Selected Philosophical Literature on Punishment and the Death Penalty. 12 July 2000

.

Costanzo, Mark. Just Revenge: Costs and Consequences of the Death Penalty.

New York: St. Martin's Press, 1997

Roy, Parama. Discovering India, Imagining Thuggee. The Yale Journal of Criticism.

1 Sept. 1996 121-145. .

Sharp, Dudley. DEATH PENALTY AND SENTENCING INFORMATION. 20 Nov. 2000 Pro Death Penalty.Com.15 Nov. 2000 .

Metzger, Bruce M. , and Roland E. Murphy, eds.

The New Oxford Annotated Bible. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991, 1994

Word Count: 2982