Aashna Shah
Mrs. Ann Peck
American Literature 6
4 December 2018
The Death of the Death Penalty
Imagine a small city called Babylon in the late 1700s. The ruler, King Hammurabi, had been working on his code of laws for over 40 years now, but this day it would be officially known to the entire civilization of Mesopotamia. In that time, punishments were: “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,” but today, punishment has changed to, “a life for a life.” Flash forward to today, and the United States, a country known for its progressive nature, still uses the death penalty in 30 of its states. It is time to rethink the death sentence and leave history behind, as the death penalty results in the deaths of hundreds of innocent lives, has not been proven to be a deterrent to violent crimes, and is a misuse of taxpayer money, making the death sentence a completely unacceptable form of punishment for the twenty-first century.
Since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976, 138 innocent people have been released from the death row, some of them minutes from their execution. Many controversial cases are currently under national review, but the 2004 execution of Cameron Todd Willingham is among the most prominent. Willingham was accused of setting fire to his home in Corsicana, Texas and killing his three daughters in the process. For this, he was charged and executed by a lethal injection (Giannelli). With new scientific research about arson indicators, the case was recently reexamined and Willingham was found innocent. According to nationally renowned fire scientist John Lentini, “The state of Texas executed a man for a crime that they could not prove was really a crime” (“Death by Fire”). If Todd Willingham was found guilty for turning on a stove, we’re all as guilty as him in some way. Imagine it. You’re living a normal life, and a terrible accident kills all three of your children. You’re devastated. Then BAM! The next thing you know is that you’re stuck in jail, wondering what your spouse must be thinking about you, and having to deal with the fact that the entire world believes you’re a heartless murderer. That’s exactly how Willingham felt. Recent research has shown that the death penalty is biased, as people with mental illnesses or people accused of committing a crime against a white person are more likely to receive the death penalty (The Editorial Board). Prejudice needs to be eradicated in the judicial system, but until that is accomplished, the least we can do is stop creating penalties that are irreversible.
Statistically, the idea of capital punishment has not been shown to be a deterrent for criminals. All criminals know that there are going to be consequences for their actions, and they continue to break the law. Texas and Oklahoma conduct about 80 percent of all of our country’s executions, but that area still has the highest regional murder rates in the country (Alarcon). It’s been proven that most people on death row committed their crimes impulsively or while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and so the threat of being killed for their actions was not something they were considering (“Facts about the Death Penalty”). As a result, the possibility of being sentenced to death for their crime will not stop them from committing it.
Many believe that the death penalty is justified because it saves the United States money by not having to pay for prisoner’s needs, and allows that money to be used on people more valuable to society. They’ve got it all wrong. The death penalty costs millions more than keeping those inmates in prison for life, and who are we to determine a person’s value to society? Capital punishment is extremely pricey, and California itself has spent over $4.6 billion on the death penalty. But here’s the interesting part: only 20 percent of that money goes to the actual cost of killing the accused. That other 3.6 billion dollars was used for the costs of a pre-trial and trial, and petitions and appeals related to allowing the death penalty to exist (Alarcon). By replacing the death penalty with permanent imprisonment, California would save 170 million dollars annually, and when you include the other 29 states still using the death penalty, the money adds up quick (Alarcon). The death penalty costs more than a life in jail because the Constitution requires a complex process to ensure that innocent men and women are not executed, but the process does not completely eliminate the risk. By replacing the death penalty with a sentence of life without the possibility of parole, we’re able to spend that saved money on more effective crime prevention methods.
Ultimately, the death sentence must be abolished. If an accused was jailed and later found to be innocent, then he or she would still have a chance for liberation, whereas the death sentence is irreversible and does not allow for inevitable mistakes. The death sentence is not statistically an impediment to criminals and will not stop them from committing crimes. The millions of dollars saved from capital punishment could be spent improving the community in which we live and helping put our youth on the right path so that they do not end up in prisons and create the need for capital punishment in the first place. As people who will eventually lead this country, it’s our responsibility to speak up against injustices and make our voices heard in this community.