Why Capital Punishment Should Be Abolished

Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, has been and still is, one of the most controversial topics circulating the United States. Capital punishment is the execution of a human being who has committed a serious crime. It is mainly argued that the death penalty is a very unnecessary form of punishment, and it is rather a barbaric, hypocritical act. Capital Punishment should be completely abolished in the United States because it is considered ethically and morally wrong, it does not deter violence, and it could potentially kill an innocent human being. The death penalty should be considered unconstitutional in every state in the United States.

Death-Penalty Issue

One of the many arguments against the death penalty is that the killing of another human being is morally and ethically unjust. It is unacceptable to take a human life no matter the circumstance. Many different types of religion support this idea and see the death penalty as a wrong justice to be enforced. In the article “Death-Penalty Issue Stirs Divergent Religious View” the author states how different religions have similar views when it comes to the death penalty.

To clarify, killing a man or woman in the eyes of religion is inhumane, barbarous, and wicked. To conclude the voice of many religions, in this case specifically Catholics, the death penalty is seen as unscrupulous and dishonorable. The death penalty is extremely barbaric and unnecessary in the eyes of religion and through people who have certain morals that no person shall be executed no matter what crime has been committed.

Following up with morals and ethics, is an article that supports the abolishment on capital punishment, “Kill the Death Penalty” written by Sunil Dutta. The article is in the viewpoint of a police officer, Dutta has experienced many grievances while working in the field as well as unjust life experiences, throughout her life the author still is repulsed with the idea of the death penalty and the hypocrisy of the use of it within the government.

We play the role of God by judging who will die and who will live, while capital punishment sends out a dangerous message to impressionable minds that violence is a way to resolve problems” (Dutta). Throughout the article the author supports the idea that capital punishment is indeed immoral and goes against many values of ethics through killing another human being (Dutta). The death penalty is sending out the message that the use of violence is allowed only when it is the government’s doing.

The death penalty is essentially legalized murder, the use of it is extremely unnecessary instead of finding new, morally just ways, capital punishment is used to just get rid of one part of the problem rather than the whole issue circulating around the United States. The government is promoting death rather than suppressing it, the consequences and the enforcement used to stop crimes are hypocritical.

The use of the death penalty is unnecessary in any state in America, especially because it does not fix or limit any act of violence. What kind of message does it show to use an act of violence on someone who has committed a violent crime? The law to kill another being is extremely hypocritical and instead of deterring violence and crimes it will instead enable acts of violence. The government is only making it acceptable for them to commit such heinous acts which sends a bad message across the United States.

By setting the death penalty in place it is encouraging everyone that it is okay to kill others because such acts are used by the government, instead of threatening criminals with the possibility of death.

If capital punishment continues the likelihood of an innocent person being executed increases more and more. In the paper “Science and the Death Penalty: DNA, Innocence, and the Debate over Capital Punishment” the author explains throughout the article the amount of DNA exonerations that have occurred throughout the United States. The authors give many examples of states who no longer believe the death penalty constitutional because of the high risk on a innocent being killed (Aronson and Cole). They express,

“The issue of innocence played a central role in the New York State legislature’s failure to reinstate the death penalty after it was overturned on a constitutional violation. On March 18, 2009, Governor Bill Richard- son signed a law repealing the death penalty in New Mexico. Innocence was singled out as the most important reason for his decision”.

This proves how much leaders in the United States are coming to the realization that the death penalty is not effective and can lead to many innocent lives being ruined because of wrong accusations and claims. The authors also state “Perhaps the most powerful impact of the innocence argument was felt in the case United States v. Quinones (2002b), in which federal district Judge Jed Rakoff ruled that evidence concerning the near-execution of factually innocent people rendered capital punishment unconstitutional”.

Throughout the article, the authors express as well the number of DNA exonerations that have been made throughout the United States which proves how dangerous the death penalty really is and how it should not be legal anymore in the United States (Arsonon and Cole). The death penalty puts many lives at risk and an innocent person should not be in danger for potentially being executed for a crime they did not commit. Is capital punishment really that necessary if the likelihood of an innocent person being executed increases each year?

With the number of accusations and trials concerning the death penalty, it is highly likely many people have been persecuted and executed for a crime they have not committed. In the article “Kill the Death Penalty” the author brings up the argument stating “Our criminal justice system does have corrupt prosecutors, lying crime-lab analysts, crooked cops and blind judges who have railroaded innocent people onto death row”.

How many innocent people were executed because of mistakes in the trial? Although many people on death row have committed such heinous crimes, is it really worth the risk to potentially kill an innocent life? If the death penalty creates more problems than fixes them, it should be ruled unconstitutional. Despite all the arguments promoting the use of the death penalty, any potential killing of an innocent human being for a crime they did not commit should not even be allowed.

Conclusion

The death penalty is a cruel punishment, that promotes violence, is extremely barbaric, and should be abolished immediately throughout America. The arguments supported that capital punishment is extremely unnecessary as it goes against morals, encourages violence rather than deterring it and that it can potentially execute an innocent life because of wrongful accusations. The death penalty is not worth the risk, instead, life-imprisonment is much more promising and safer to the American society rather than wasting money away on criminals who deserve to stay away and be forgotten.