Day 1
Audra Day
Professor Gary Cox
Criminal Justice 1010
20 November 2013
The Death Penalty in the United States
The death penalty —or capital punishment— is defined as the use of executions to punish
certain crimes. It has a very long history in America. This country started out with executions of
people without any real proof. They were hung or shot for a variety of reasons. Today, we have
many states that have completely gotten rid of the death penalty. How have we, as a country,
moved away from daily public executions, to considering abolishing the death penalty in every
state? In this paper I will first be covering the history of the death penalty, specifically in the
United States, as well as then arguing my opinion on whether or not we should continue using
the death penalty in our country.
The death penalty has been around for an extremely long time, since the beginning of
written history. The very first death penalty laws in the entire world go back to as far as the
eighteenth century B.C. It started out with Hammurabi’s code, which made 25 crimes punishable
by death. Another early use of the death penalty was the Draconian Code of Athens in the
seventh century. This code made the punishment for every crime death. Executions during this
timer were done by “crucifixion, drowning, beating to death, burning alive, and impalement”
(“Part I”).
In the early beginnings of the United States, Britain influenced the country’s use of
capital punishment. European settlers brought capital punishment with them to their settlements.
. Hanging became the traditional method of execution in both England and America. Different
Day 2
colonies had different laws concerning capital punishment. Death was usually the punishment for
crimes such as striking your mother and mother or contradicting the “true god” (“Part I”).
The first execution in the United States was of George Kendall in 1608. He was from
Virginia, and his crime was plotting to betray the British to the Spanish. During that time,
criminals were executed for many reasons, such as adultery, rebellion and witchcraft. Eventually,
Virginia softened death penalty laws because they feared people would not settle there (Reggie).
Capital punishment didn’t really reform until the mid-1800’s. Thomas Jefferson and a
few others completely revised Virginia’s laws. They passed a controversial law that
recommended the death penalty for only the crimes of murder and treason. Public executions
were finally starting to be seen as cruel and unusual. There were many other problems associated
with public executions at that time. Tens of thousands of people often showed up to watch, and
there were problems with drunkenness and injuries associated with fighting and pushing to get a
better view. Many states passed laws for private hangings only (Reggie).
The first state to abolish the death penalty was Michigan in 1846. Several states followed,
but many reformers moved on to focus on abolition instead. Reform continued anyways, as many
states got rid of mandatory death sentences. They used discretion to decide who should be
executed; depending on the type of crime they had committed (Reggie).
The first big court case dealing with the death penalty was in 1972, in the case Furman v.
Georgia. Furman was burglarizing a house, when a resident discovered him robbing the house.
While trying to leave, he tripped and the gun went off, killing the resident of the house. Furman
was sentenced to death by the state of Georgia. The case eventually went to the Supreme Court.
They then ruled that the death penalty was cruel and unusual punishment, and therefore illegal.
Capital punishment was abolished for a year in the United States (“Furman”).
Day 3
Four years later in 1976, the Supreme Court reversed their decision in the case Gregg v
Georgia. Troy Gregg was found guilty of two murders and sentenced to execution. The Supreme
Court then heard his case, and ruled against him. He was the first person whose death sentence
was accepted by the Supreme Court. They reasoned that since he was tried and sentenced fairly
in Georgia’s state Judicial Court, the execution was legal, and not a violation of the fourth and
eighth amendments to the constitution, as Gregg had claimed (“Gregg”).
After that, many other states added their own death penalty laws. Since then there has
been another era of reform. There has been a huge debate lately on whether or not we should
keep the death penalty around. There are 18 states that do not currently have the death penalty.
They passed laws over the years through their respective states, to make capital punishment
illegal. That leaves 32 states that still have the death penalty, plus the United States government
and military (“States”).
There are two different sides concerning the death penalty. On one side, there are people
who think we should keep the death penalty around. They believe that some crimes are so
horrible and heinous that the punishment should be death in order to bring closure to their
victim’s families. They also say that it makes more financial sense to execute criminals without
having to feed them and house them for the rest of their lives.
On the other side there are people who believe killing people, for any reason, is wrong.
They want to get rid of the death penalty. I, personally, am on this side. There are many reasons
why I, and many other people, believe that.
My first reason for my opinion is that there is always the possibility of the execution of
innocent people. Of course, anyone convicted of a crime is usually guilty, but mistakes are made
all the time. The internet is full of news of exonerated prisoners who would have been executed
Day 4
if new information wasn’t discovered in time. How many innocents have been killed due to
mistakes that weren’t found in time? I believe execution is a much too permanent punishment.
You can’t make up for mistakes if the punishment is death. There is always the possibility they
are innocent and that is a risk we shouldn’t take.
I also believe that taking someone’s life is morally wrong. Just as it is wrong to commit a
murder, it is wrong to execute a criminal, even if they have committed a murder themselves.
What message do we send to everyone if we say that killing someone is ok, as long as the
government is the one doing it? No one has the right to take someone’s life away from them,
especially the government. They shouldn’t have the power to decide who lives and who dies.
Morally, no one should have the right to send another person to die. It has nothing to do with
religion or politics; it is simply basic human decency.
The death penalty is also biased not only because of race, but also how wealthy the
defendant is. It is proven that a black defendant that murdered a white victim is twenty times
more likely to get sentenced to death than a white defendant who murdered a black person is
(“Race”). Plus, a wealthier defendant can afford better lawyers. High paid lawyers will have
lighter case loads and can focus on getting you out of the death penalty. They rarely get
sentenced to execution. If you can’t afford your own attorney, and you have a public defender
appointed to you, you are far more likely to get the death penalty. Your public defender does not
have time and they aren’t paid enough money to save your life! What kind of justice system
would kill one man, but not another who committed the exact same crime, because of his race or
his economic status? That is not fair at all, and no one can argue with that.
There is also the issue of location. Depending on what state you committed your crime
and were tried in, you may have a higher or lower chance of getting executed for the same crime
Day 5
of someone in a different location. 82% of all executions have actually taken place in the South
since 1976. Furthermore, Texas and Virginia alone have had more executions than the entire
regions of the Northeast, Midwest, and West (“Death Penalty and Arbitrariness”). Why should
we kill someone, depending on where they are at the time of their crime? We can’t execute one
person and not the other just because of their geographic location, because we are dealing with
someone’s life-- with someone’s child or brother or wife or whatever.
One of the biggest reasons the death penalty is still used, and why some people still argue
it is a good idea, is to deter crime. But really, if someone is stabbing someone, they are not
thinking, “Oh I better not do this or I’ll get executed.” Murders are going to happen whether or
not the punishment is death. It is sad, and it is horrible for the victim and their family, but the
threat of death once you get caught is not going to stop someone from committing a murder. In
fact, “A recent survey of the most leading criminologists in the country found that the
overwhelming majority did not believe that the death penalty is a proven deterrent to homicide”
(“Facts about Deterrence”). Plus, the murder rates per person were actually much lower in states
that don’t have the death penalty, opposed to states that do have it (“The Death Penalty and
Deterrence”). What’s the point of ending someone’s life if it doesn’t have any effect on crimes,
such as murder?
Another big reason for supporters of the death penalty is for monetary reasons. In my
opinion, anything financial should be considered secondary to moral dilemmas, especially when
the issue is someone’s life, no matter if the person is a murderer. But in fact, it actually is much
more expensive to seek the death penalty because of the long judicial process that is required in
the United States Constitution for capital cases (“Death Penalty”). And it’s not like criminals
who would be sentenced to death, but instead get life in prison, live this luxurious lifestyle that
Day 6
we as taxpayers have to pay for. They don’t have an enjoyable life, and they don’t get rewarded
for killing someone by getting a free room for the rest of their life. It doesn’t cost that much to
keep someone in prison for their entire life, they don’t have a comfortable lifestyle, and it costs
less than executing them.
Some argue that the execution of murderers can bring closure to the families who have
lost a loved one due to that murderer. I can’t imagine what it would be like for someone to lose
someone they love in such a horrible and violent way. I understand that it must be unbearable,
and it seems like the death of the murderer that took that person from you is the only way to
make it ok. But the execution of that person is not going to bring your loved one back. It does not
bring any more closure than having that person locked up until the day they die. Either way, it is
going to be a sad, tough situation. More death is not going to make it any easier. The person that
killed your loved one has a family too. Why would you want to make more people suffer? Why
would you put someone else through what you have gone through, just to try to make it seem a
little bit better for you?
The death penalty is also inhumane. Early in the history of capital punishment, people
will killed in a variety of painful, slow ways. Hanging can take up to twenty minutes to kill
someone, after all. Now we use mostly lethal injections to execute criminals. This still does not
guarantee that their death is painless or quick. It takes only a small miscalculation to prolong
someone’s suffering. No one can argue that a long, horrible death is not something we should
force on someone, no matter what horrible crimes they have committed.
The death penalty is outdated. I honestly believe that eventually we, as a country, will
completely abolish it. Not anytime soon of course, but the direction we are heading is to be more
tolerant and humane. I don’t think we should let murderers out to kill and cause more suffering,
Day 7
but that doesn’t mean we should execute them. Life in prison is plenty of punishment for what
they did. They can sit and think of what they have done and live the rest of their lives in a cell.
For all the reasons listed above, I believe that we should get rid of the death penalty in the
rest of the United States. It is outdated and inhumane. Why would we kill someone just to show
everyone that killing people is wrong? There is no logical, moral or monetary reason for keeping
the death penalty around.
Day 8
Works Cited
“Facts about Deterrence and the Death Penalty.” Death Penalty Information Center. Death
Penalty Information Center, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2013
"Death Penalty and Arbitrariness." Amnestyusa.org. Amnesty International USA, n.d. Web. 20
Nov. 2013.
"Furman v. Georgia." Oyez.org. Oyez, Inc., n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2013.
“Death Penalty: The High Cost of the Death Penalty.” Death Penalty Focus, n.d. Web. 13 Nov
2013.
"The Death Penalty and Deterrence." Amnestyusa.org. Amnesty International USA, 2012. Web.
20 Nov. 2013.
"Gregg v. Georgia." Laws.com. Laws.com, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2013.
"Part I: History of the Death Penalty." Death Penalty Information Center. Death Penalty
Information Center, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2013.
"Race of Death Row Inmates Executed Since 1976." Death Penalty Information Center. Death
Penalty Information Center, 20 Nov. 2013. Web. 18 Nov. 2013.
Reggie, Micheal H. "History of the Death Penalty." PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2013.
"States With and Without the Death Penalty." Death Penalty Information Center. Death Penalty
Information Center, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2013.