Should the state have the right to end people’s lives as a punishment? Is that ever going to be effective in reducing the pain and suffering inflicted by the most heinous crimes, let alone eradicating them completely? I do not deny that those who commit statutory wrongs in our society should be punished, but I wonder whether this particular disciplinary method is serving as an effective deterrent. Outside of certain particularized situations, I can no longer accept that it is.
Albert Camus once said, “For centuries the death penalty, often accompanied by barbarous refinements, has been trying to hold crime in check; yet crime persists. Why? Because the instincts that are warring in man are not, as the law claims, constant forces in a state of equilibrium.” The death penalty should not be used simply due to the fact that the human mind is not under the absolute directional control that the relevant laws dictate. If it was, why did murder and treason still take place in medieval society when the punishments for such crimes were often gruesome public executions? Why do they occur still to this day? Human instincts regarding crimes cannot be completely framed by the law. Their unpredictable nature doesn’t allow it. Because we’ve relied too much on the law, we may have forgotten about the complicated and spontaneous nature of crime.
Not only does the death penalty seem to fail philosophically, it is also not the most productive mechanism for crime prevention. According to a survey of former and current presidents of the country’s top academic criminological societies, 88 percent of these experts rejected the notion that the death penalty acts as a competent deterrent to murder. In this country, the South accounts for more than 80 percent of executions. However, it is the Northeast that has the lowest murder rate, even though it has less than 1 percent of all executions. Based on the statistics, the death penalty does not seem to properly serve the general pursuit of the popular eye-for-an-eye logic.
The death penalty is also not the ideal option to choose based on the extremely high cost of carrying it out. A study in California revealed that the cost of the death penalty in that state has been more than $4 billion since 1978, including pretrial and trial costs, costs of automatic appeals and state habeas corpus petitions, costs of federal habeas corpus appeals and costs of incarceration on death row. A 2009 poll commissioned by the Death Penalty Information Center found police chiefs ranked the death penalty last among ways to reduce violent crime. The chiefs also considered the death penalty the least efficient use of taxpayers’ money.
So, death as a punishment has generally proven to be ineffective and costly. That wasted money could be used in helping to re-educate those who are deemed to be adjustable to society, or manage criminals in a more organized way in prisons. It could also be used to improve the living conditions of people through extensive social programs targeted at preventing violent crimes. We will never be able to prevent violence at the individual level. However, we could use the resources more sensibly to reduce the chance of the horrible crimes at the macro level.
In “Titus Andronicus,” William Shakespeare wrote, “Terras Astraea reliquit.” This means that the goddess of justice, Astraea, has left the Earth. Because the heavenly order has failed to give humans a reasonable justice, they are forced to forge their own path of fairness. In the play, Titus sought violent revenge for losing his children, murdering all the people involved in the tragedy that had befallen him and his family. However, after realizing his bloody goals, he dies. Ultimately, Titus’ eye-for-an-eye approach, while successful in catapulting his family to the throne, eventually sacrificed the reputation of his country. Can this be a true justice? Surely, it cannot.
Hae Rin is a freshman majoring in history. What do you think of her perspective? Do you think that the possible merits of the death penalty are vastly outweighed by its very real shortcomings. We would like to know what your thoughts are on this. Please send thoughts and comments to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
