Death Penalty Essay, Research Paper

When New York State?s governor George Pataki took office in 1995, crime

dropped in total of 45%, and the murder rate dropped by 1/3. As of September 1st

1995, the death penalty was reinstated in the state of New York, assuring safer

communities and fewer victims, and an over all drop in crime rate. People have

used a number of arguments to support their views regarding the death penalty.

Among the arguments used include deterrence, incapacitation, religious

viewpoint, rehabilitation and cost. Yet it is suggested that the true judgement

of a persons position on capital punishment is determined by emotional and moral

beliefs. The primary questions raised by the death penalty are whether it is an

effective deterrent to violent crime, and whether it is more effective than the

long-term incapacitation. Defenders of the death penalty believe that by taking

an offender?s life is a more severe punishment than any prison term, it must

be the better deterrent. ?A life term is commonly a short vacation at State

expense with nothing to do but eat the fruit of others industry.? (Opposing,

p43.) The term deterrence is used to suggest that with the execution of

murderers, there will be a direct decrease in homicide rate, due to the idea

that potential murderers will fear for their own lives. Under New York?s death

penalty law offenders involving: murder of a police officer; a probation,

parole, court, or corrections officer; a judge; or a witness or members of

witness?s family. Also those who murder while already serving life in prison,

escaping from prison, or committing other serious felonies, as well contract

killers, serial murderers, those who torture their victims, and those who have

murdered before. It is criminals and crimes like these that impose fear in our

communities. Due to change in sentencing laws, and other weaknesses in the

system, society is not protected from acts of crime. In 1962, James Moore raped

and murdered a 14 year old girl. He was not sentenced to death, but instead life

imprisonment. Twenty years later, due to a change in our system, Moore is

eligible for parole every two years. It is criminals like Moore, who do not

deserve the right to live, certainly not amongst innocent communities. In 1868,

in a debate before England?s Parliament one man stated ?It is better that

the murderer should parish than that innocent men and women should have their

throats cut.? (Opposing, p57.) It are those individuals who commit a crime so

grave, that they relinquish their right to life. On a religious and moral

standpoint, it is said that the death penalty is a fitting punishment. Written

in the bible by Luke: ?a certain man planted a vineyard, leased it to

vinedressers, and went into a far country for a long time. Now at vintage-time

he sent a servant to the vinedressers, that they might gave him some of the

fruit of the vineyard. But the vinedressers beat him and sent him away

empty-handed. Again he sent another servant; and they beat him also, treated him

shamefully, and sent him away empty-handed. And again he sent a third; and they

wounded him and cast him out. Then the owner of the vineyard said, ?what shall

I do? I will send my beloved son. Probably they will respect him when they see

him..? But when the vinefressers saw him, they reasoned among themselves,

saying, ?This is the heir. Come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be

ours.? So they cast him out of the vineyard and killed him. Therefore what

will the owner of the vineyard do to them? He will come and destroy those

vinedressers and give the vineyard to others.?-Luke 20:9-16. (Pro-capital,

p15.) It is said that in this passage Jesus states that the probable punishment

for murder is death. Christians who morally support the death penalty may do so

for two reasons; they believe in an ?eye for an eye?, meaning that with

those whose crimes are to grave, they deserve to die. They also believe if the

criminal is repentant of the crime they committed, they are regretful for doing

so, then by their execution they are justified to the Lord. Next there is the

issue of rehabilitation. Abolitionists who support the concept of rehabilitation

for murderers believe that imprisonment is effective in preventing murders from

happening again. Murderers have the lowest rates of effective rehabilitation.

Those who murder generally show no remorse, or guilt, and have the ability to

kill again. In fact, murderers who serve time in prison are more likely to

commit more murders, whether in prison, or upon their release. Civilization must

have rules to follow otherwise there will be utter chaos. With 3/4ths of

Americans in favor of the death penalty, and murder rates in New York State down

by nearly 1/3, one must question the downside of capital punishment. An

effective punishment not only forfeits the rights of the criminal, it deters

crime, increases public safety and helps provide restitution to victims. All

these components are found in the newly reinstated death penalty law. ?Death

has a property that life in prison does not: finality.? (Does, p34.)

1. Hagg, Ernest Van Den & Conrad, John. The Death Penalty; A Debate

Pro/Con. Plenum Publishing Corporation, New York. 1983. 2. Bender, L. David

& Leone, Bruno. The Death Penalty; Opposing Viewpoints. Greenhaven Press,

Inc., San Diego. 1998. 3. Barbour, Scott & Schonebaum, Stephen. Does Capital

Punishment Deter Crime? Greenhaven Press, Inc., Sand Diego. 1998. INTERNET: 1.

?Pro Capital Punishment.? Http://www.m.edu/~ww12461/cp.num.