“Punishment tames man, but does not make him better”
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche
As human society evolved, certain behavior was deemed inappropriate and codified as religious and secular doctrines developed. For those found guilty of committing such offenses, a variety of penalties was meted out, many of which were cruel and barbaric. Perpetrators of the most serious offenses faced the loss of their life.
However, capital punishment did not come into widespread use until the Middle Ages when its imposition was prevalent for crimes threatening the state and/or church. The Inquisition, with unmatched efficiency, sentenced hundreds of innocent people to death for little more than personal beliefs which differed from Catholic theology.
By the mid-1700s, England had more than 200 offenses for which death was mandated. Most were abolished a century later and capital punishment was permanently outlawed in 1969. Most European and Latin-American countries have also done away with the death penalty, as have Canada and Australia.
Meantime, more than 13,000 individuals have been executed in the United States since our colonial period. Most frequently prescribed for those convicted of murder … kidnapping, rape, robbery, treason and heresy have also been crimes for which the death penalty has been imposed.
In the process, capital punishment has been meted out to non-white men, the poor and those advocating non-Christian religious views in numbers far disproportionate to their percentages of our population. Moreover, when victims were white, Christian males of property, the death penalty was more frequently imposed than when the victims came from different “stock”.
In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled state laws governing the imposition of the death penalty were “arbitrary and capricious” thus violating both the Eighth (prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment) and Fourteenth (guarantees of equal protection and due process) Amendments. Four years later, the Court reversed itself in declaring, capital punishment “does not invariably violate the Constitution” when rendered in a manner which is neither arbitrary nor discriminatory.
Many states then rewrote their death penalty statutes and began to execute those subsequently convicted of committing capital offenses. Today, thirty-seven states permit the death penalty and more than 2,000 people currently live on death row.
Still, the debate rages on. Does a society have the right to kill people?
Many Americans believe it does for a limited number of crimes, particularly for murder. Justifications for such executions range from “an eye for an eye” retribution to its perceived deterrence value. But, the facts tell a different tale.
There is no credible evidence the death penalty deters murder. Most murders are committed by individuals under the influence of alcohol or drugs or in the heat of passion, giving little consideration to the implications of their actions. Many others result from inner city gang-related activities, where society’s laws are routinely ignored. The few professional executioners who kill never have any thought of being caught in the first place.
Meantime, we live in a society where rapists are not sentenced to be raped, robbers are not subsequently robbed nor do we torch the residence of an arsonist. Neither should we murder murders. To do so simply reduces society to its lowest common denominator, the abhorrent behavior it seeks to punish.
Finally, capital punishment carries the risk of making a “mistake” and executing an innocent person. Despite all the apparent safeguards, 350 individuals convicted of capital offenses in this century were later proven to have been innocent … with 21% of those convictions taking place between 1970 and 1985. While most spent decades in prison … twenty-five innocent people were executed!
A surprising number of Americans appear to accept such “mistakes” as the price of keeping law and order.
Equally frightening are laws such as those in Texas, where newly discovered evidence becomes inadmissible 30-days after the conclusion of a trial. A man currently on Texas’ death row may soon be executed for a crime he probably did not commit. Despite compelling evidence suggesting his innocence, the Supreme Court refused to entertain a review of the case because “actual innocence is not itself a constitutional claim”. Again, order appears precedent over truth.
While calls for increased use of capital punishment make politicians sound tough on crime and may satisfy the public’s yen for retribution, it is immoral, unnecessary, often discriminatory in its application and does little to deter crime. Meantime, incarceration, a less satisfying solution, one admittedly needing reforms, preserves the ultimate safeguard, that of not taking a possibly innocent life.
For death penalty proponents, two questions. (1) If their child was on death row, could they pull the switch? (2) If they or a loved one were wrongfully convicted of a capital crime, how would they view the increasing “efficiencies” in thwarting a fair and just appeals process?
When order takes precedent over justice, liberties will ultimately become the first casualties.
