Kelly1
In defense of the death penalty, argue against the following objections: (1) The death penalty is
a basis of discrimination; (2) Sometimes innocent people are given the death penalty; and (3) Its
effect as a deterrent is just about the same as life in prison. Which is the strongest objection, and
which is the weakest? Explain why.
The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is the ultimate punishment given by
certain States for crimes such as murder. However, there has been much controversy and
objections to the use of the death penalty, primarily because it is final in its outcome. In other
words, once the death penalty is carried out, there is no way to reverse its effect. Presently about
fifty-four countries worldwide retain and use this punishment. This number includes the USA
and a number of countries in the Caribbean. Throughout history, various methods of the death
penalty have been used and some forms of it, especially in ancient times, were quite barbaric.
For example: dismemberment, disembowelment, burning, and crucifixion were some of the
methods used. Most States today have moved towards the use of more acceptable methods of
capital punishment, some of which are: lethal injection, hanging, death by firing squad, and
electrocution. Despite the changes made in many areas related to the death penalty, there are
many opposing voices. There are three main grounds given for this opposition against the use of
the death penalty, and they are: (1) The death penalty is discriminatory; (2) It is no more
effective as a deterrent than life imprisonment; (3) Sometimes innocent people are killed.
One of the cries made against the death penalty is, it is discriminatory, and therefore, the
practice should be discontinued. Regarding a U.S. Supreme Court case, Robert Grant wrote,
“The court ruled that the way in which capital punishment statutes were administered was
unconstitutional. After reviewing the statistics from the 1920 through the 1960, the majority
concluded ‘The death sentence is disproportionately imposed and carried out on the poor, the
, Kelly2
negro and members of unpopular groups,’ ” (Grant,168). What is obvious from this statement is
that, it is the administration of justice which is the problem, not capital punishment of itself.
If the administration of justice is the cause of the problem of discrimination, how will getting
rid of capital punishment solve the problem of discrimination? The problem of discrimination is
found throughout the entire justice system, in some areas of education and, in the business world.
Since there is discrimination throughout the justice system, should we get rid of all forms of
punishments in order to get rid of discrimination? Should we stop all Police officers from
carrying out their duties in order to solve the problem of discrimination for which police officers
are often blamed? Try to take this position with education and the business world, and we would
have to literally shut down the entire country, because discrimination is a widespread problem.
This shows that the argument against capital punishment, based on discrimination, is not a very
strong one, and does not stand up very well to any critical analysis.
So, why do opposers of capital punishment keep pushing this argument? One possible reason
is that discrimination is a very sensitive issue, and evokes a negative response and attitude to
whatever or whoever is causing the discrimination. When people in general are upset about a
matter, their ability to reason critically usually becomes warped. Therefore, they will blame the
justice system’s flaw on capital punishment, because this is what is being held up before them.
Those who use the argument of discrimination are in effect pointing to a serious problem in the
administration of justice. The death penalty is not the cause of the discrimination found in the
justice system. It is the system itself which is at fault. It is the justice system therefore, which
needs fixing. Ernest Haag implied this when he said, “ If as I contend, capital punishment is just
and not inherently discriminatory, it remains desirable to eliminate inequality in distribution, to
apply the penalty to all who deserve it, sparing no racial or economic class,” (Haag, 174).
In defense of the death penalty, argue against the following objections: (1) The death penalty is
a basis of discrimination; (2) Sometimes innocent people are given the death penalty; and (3) Its
effect as a deterrent is just about the same as life in prison. Which is the strongest objection, and
which is the weakest? Explain why.
The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is the ultimate punishment given by
certain States for crimes such as murder. However, there has been much controversy and
objections to the use of the death penalty, primarily because it is final in its outcome. In other
words, once the death penalty is carried out, there is no way to reverse its effect. Presently about
fifty-four countries worldwide retain and use this punishment. This number includes the USA
and a number of countries in the Caribbean. Throughout history, various methods of the death
penalty have been used and some forms of it, especially in ancient times, were quite barbaric.
For example: dismemberment, disembowelment, burning, and crucifixion were some of the
methods used. Most States today have moved towards the use of more acceptable methods of
capital punishment, some of which are: lethal injection, hanging, death by firing squad, and
electrocution. Despite the changes made in many areas related to the death penalty, there are
many opposing voices. There are three main grounds given for this opposition against the use of
the death penalty, and they are: (1) The death penalty is discriminatory; (2) It is no more
effective as a deterrent than life imprisonment; (3) Sometimes innocent people are killed.
One of the cries made against the death penalty is, it is discriminatory, and therefore, the
practice should be discontinued. Regarding a U.S. Supreme Court case, Robert Grant wrote,
“The court ruled that the way in which capital punishment statutes were administered was
unconstitutional. After reviewing the statistics from the 1920 through the 1960, the majority
concluded ‘The death sentence is disproportionately imposed and carried out on the poor, the
, Kelly2
negro and members of unpopular groups,’ ” (Grant,168). What is obvious from this statement is
that, it is the administration of justice which is the problem, not capital punishment of itself.
If the administration of justice is the cause of the problem of discrimination, how will getting
rid of capital punishment solve the problem of discrimination? The problem of discrimination is
found throughout the entire justice system, in some areas of education and, in the business world.
Since there is discrimination throughout the justice system, should we get rid of all forms of
punishments in order to get rid of discrimination? Should we stop all Police officers from
carrying out their duties in order to solve the problem of discrimination for which police officers
are often blamed? Try to take this position with education and the business world, and we would
have to literally shut down the entire country, because discrimination is a widespread problem.
This shows that the argument against capital punishment, based on discrimination, is not a very
strong one, and does not stand up very well to any critical analysis.
So, why do opposers of capital punishment keep pushing this argument? One possible reason
is that discrimination is a very sensitive issue, and evokes a negative response and attitude to
whatever or whoever is causing the discrimination. When people in general are upset about a
matter, their ability to reason critically usually becomes warped. Therefore, they will blame the
justice system’s flaw on capital punishment, because this is what is being held up before them.
Those who use the argument of discrimination are in effect pointing to a serious problem in the
administration of justice. The death penalty is not the cause of the discrimination found in the
justice system. It is the system itself which is at fault. It is the justice system therefore, which
needs fixing. Ernest Haag implied this when he said, “ If as I contend, capital punishment is just
and not inherently discriminatory, it remains desirable to eliminate inequality in distribution, to
apply the penalty to all who deserve it, sparing no racial or economic class,” (Haag, 174).
