NOTE: I have available on the NU debate wiki the .docx files for all briefs, so that one may correctly view the supplemental graphs and charts.
Death Penalty
THW instate a moratorium on the Death Penalty.
THW ban the Death Penalty.
|
|
Overview/Background
1,136 people were executed in the US from 1977 through 2008, primarily by means of lethal injection. The United States remains in the minority of nations in the world that still uses death as penalty for certain crimes. Many see the penalty as barbaric and against American values. Others see it as a very important tool in fighting violent pre-meditated murder. Two things have once again brought this issue to national debate. One is the release of some highly publicized studies that show a number of innocents had been put to death. The second is the issue of terrorism and the need to punish its perpetrators.
One of the most prominent and influential U.S. Supreme Court cases involving capital punishment was the 1972 case Furman v. Georgia. Concluding that the death sentence in thirty-five states had been applied unfairly, the Court placed a moratorium on executions until new standards could ensure evenhandedness in the administration of capital punishment. The Court's specific concerns were that states had applied the death penalty in a way that violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Several justices cited factors such as racial discrimination, the poor quality of court-appointed lawyers for the accused, and the risk of executing
the innocent as proof that the death penalty had become inhumane.
As a result of the Furman ruling, several states passed statutes designed to prevent arbitrariness and discrimination in death penalty cases. These statutes created significant capital-punishment reforms, including the abolition of mandatory death penalties, limiting state-level capital punishment to the crime of murder, and obligatory appeals of death sentences. The Supreme Court then reinstated the death penalty in 1976, enabling states to resume executions in 1977. During the 1980s and 1990s, a rise in the U.S. homicide rate apparently bolstered popular support for capital punishment. Polls reveal that since the mid-1990s, 60 to 75 percent of the American public has favored the death penalty, with many maintaining that it is the most just punishment for the crime of murder
Since 1977, more than 110 death-row inmates have been released after new information revealed that they had been erroneously convicted. Police misconduct, suppressed evidence, coerced confessions, inept legal representation, mistaken identification, false testimony, and juror prejudice can lead to wrongful convictions. Institutional discrimination based on race, class, or social status can also be a factor. Poor defendants are particularly disadvantaged, critics claim, because they cannot afford their own legal representation and may be assigned court-appointed lawyers who are inexperienced, overworked, or underpaid.
63% of Americans favor a moratorium on the death penalty.
80% Believe that the death penalty has been extended to an innocent person.
Yes
1. Financial costs to taxpayers of capital punishment is several times that of keeping someone in prison for life. Most people don't realize that carrying out one death sentence costs 2-5 times more than keeping that same criminal in prison for the rest of his life. The reason is that with the endless appeals, additional required procedures, and legal wrangling that drag the process out, it consumes far more money than it would cost to feed and house a prisoner. It's not unusual for a prisoner to be on death row for 15-20 years. Judges, attorneys, court reporters, clerks, and court facilities all require a substantial investment by the taxpayers.
2. The Death Penalty leaves no room for error or adjustment of sentencing. There has been an astounding number of cases were prior to, or after the administration of the death penalty, evidence was deemed insufficient or just overruled, and prisoners were let go, or already dead. In a justice system based upon evidence, we must not forget that oftentimes prosecutors and cops can and will fabricate evidence. We should never impose an irrevocable sentence, because evidence is always subject to change. As is the case with Anthony Graves, released from Death Row on October 27, 2010. He was convicted in 1992 of murdering an entire family, in Somerville, Texas. He was somehow convicted on the basis that some correctional officers supposedly heard him confess to the crime, which was apparently enough to convince 12 jurors that he was guilty.
3. It is barbaric and violates the "cruel and unusual" clause in the Bill of Rights. Whether it's a firing squad, electric chair, gas chamber, lethal injection, or hanging, it's barbaric to allow state-sanctioned murder before a crowd of people. We condemn people like Saddam Hussein and Kim Jong Il when they murder their own people while we continue to do the same (although our procedures for allowing it are obviously more thorough). The 8th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prevents the use of "cruel and unusual punishment". Many would interpret the death penalty as violating this restriction.
4. The endless appeals and required additional procedures clog our court system. The U.S. court system goes to enormous lengths before allowing a death sentence to be carried out. All the appeals, motions, hearings, briefs, etc. monopolize much of the time of judges, attorneys, and other court employees as well as use up courtrooms & facilities. This is time & space that could be used for other unresolved matters. The court system is tremendously backed up. This would help move things along.
5. We as a society have to move away from the "eye for an eye" revenge mentality if civilization is to advance. The "eye for an eye" mentality will never solve anything. A revenge philosophy inevitably leads to an endless cycle of violence. Why do you think the Israeli-Palestine conflict has been going on for 50+ years? Why do you think gang violence in this country never seems to end? It is important to send a message to society that striking back at your enemy purely for revenge will always make matters worse. ..
6. Capital Punishment disproportionately affects racial minorities. The fact that the death penalty is doled out to minorities more shows a severe bias in the justice system. It is very problematic that we continue to kill minorities at a higher rate than the majority, because it indicates that racism still exists in American society, and we fought for so long to end the persecution of minorities. We are killing people (or by converse, not killing white people) because of their race, and it really is affecting our society by further promoting racist notions.
Despite the fact that African Americans make up only 13 percent of the nation’s population, almost 50 percent of those currently on the federal death row are African American. And even though only three people have been executed under the federal death penalty in the modern era, two of them have been racial minorities. Furthermore, all six of the next scheduled executions are African Americans.
The U.S. Department of Justice’s own figures reveal that between 2001 and 2006, 48 percent of defendants in federal cases in which the death penalty was sought were African Americans.
Taken from NAACP article, “NAACP Remains Steadfast in Ending Death Penalty & Fighting Injustice in America’s Justice System”.
7. It sends the wrong message: why kill people who kill people to show killing is wrong. Yes, we want to make sure there is accountability for crime and an effective deterrent in place; however, the death penalty has a message of "You killed one of us, so we'll kill you". The state is actually using a murder to punish someone who committed a murder. Does that make sense?
8. Life in prison is a worse punishment and a more effective deterrent. For those of you who don't feel much sympathy for a murderer, keep in mind that death may be too good for them. With a death sentence, the suffering is over in an instant. With life in prison, the pain goes on for decades. Prisoners are confined to a cage and live in an internal environment of rape and violence where they're treated as animals. And consider terrorists. Do you think they'd rather suffer the humiliation of lifelong prison or be "martyred" by a death sentence?
9. Other countries (especially in Europe) would have a more favorable image of America. It's no secret that anti-Americanism is rampant around the world. One of the reasons is America's continued use of the death penalty. We're seen as a violent, vengeful nation for such a policy. This is pretty much the same view that Europeans had of America when we continued the practice of slavery long after it had been banned in Europe.
10. Some jury members are reluctant to convict if it means putting someone to death. Many states require any jury members to be polled during the pre-trial examination to be sure they have the stomach to sentence someone to death before they're allowed to serve. Even if they're against the death penalty, they still may lie in order to get on the panel. The thought of agreeing to kill someone even influences some jury members to acquit rather than risk the death. Some prosecutors may go for a lesser charge rather than force juries into a death-or-acquit choice. Obviously, in all these situations, justice may not be served.
11. The prisoner's family must suffer from seeing their loved one put to death by the state, as well as going through the emotionally-draining appeals process. One victim's innocent family is obviously forced to suffer from a capital murder, but by enforcing a death sentence, you force another family to suffer. Why double the suffering when we don't have to?
12. It creates sympathy for the monstrous perpetrators of the crimes. Criminals usually are looked down upon by society. People are disgusted by the vile, unconscionable acts they commit and feel tremendous sympathy for the victims of murder, rape, etc. However, the death penalty has a way of shifting sympathy away from the victims and to the criminals themselves. An excellent example is the 2005 execution of former gang leader "Tookie" Williams. This is one of the original members of the notorious Crips gang, which has a long legacy of robbery, assault, and murder. This is a man who was convicted with overwhelming evidence of the murder of 4 people, some of whom he shot in the back and then laughed at the sounds they made as they died. This is a man who never even took responsibility for the crimes or apologized to the victims -- NOT ONCE! These victims had kids and spouses, but instead of sympathy for them, sympathy shifted to Tookie. Candlelight vigils were held for him. Websites like savetookie.org sprung up. Protests and a media circus ensued trying to prevent the execution, which eventually did take place -- 26 years after the crime itself! There are many cases like this, which makes a mockery of the evil crimes these degenerates commit.
13. It is useless in that it doesn't bring the victim back to life. Perhaps the biggest reason to ban the death penalty is that it doesn't change the fact that the victim is gone and will never come back. Hate, revenge, and anger will never cure the emptiness of a lost loved one. Forgiveness is the only way to start the healing process, and this won't happen in a revenge-focused individual.
No
1. The Death Penalty upholds the social contract implicit between a government and its people. Immanuel Kant, when discussing capital punishment said, “A society that is not willing to demand a life of somebody who has taken somebody else’s life is simply immoral.” What Kant meant by this is that as a governing body, a society is inherently part of a ‘social contract’. Social contract is the implicit ‘contract’ between a government and the people under it. John Locke, Jean Jacques Rousseau, and Thomas Hobbes discuss how a government is established and legitimized by the ‘will of the people’. The idea is that humans, being naturally wild (living in nature) were in a constant state of war with nature, but out of a desire for survival, began to live together. In the wild, every man/woman has the ability to kill another (I can come up to you and slit your throat… it’s that simple), but in a sort of, “I won’t kill you if you don’t kill me” fashion, we suspend our abilities to kill or harm another individual in assurance of ‘mutual survival’. When a person breaks this social contract, it is up to the government, which is given authority by the people, must respond in kind to remove that right. The thought goes, “since this person had an inherent agreement not to kill the now deceased individual, someone must hold them to the broken end of the deal. Since a government is the body invested with power by the masses, it is best suited to uphold the contract for the now deceased person.” If a government does not do this, then they do not uphold the contract implicit in society, and is thus immoral, according to Kant.
In the instance of death penalty for espionage/treason, similar logic would also follow, being that the government also has the duty to protect its people from other governing bodies that might desire to force the people in the other country into a different social contract. This is talked about in Hobbe’s Leviathan, and Machiavelli’s The Prince.
2. The death penalty gives closure to the victim's families who have suffered so much. Some family members of crime victims may take years or decades to recover from the shock and loss of a loved one. Some may never recover. One of the things that helps hasten this recovery is to achieve some kind of closure. Life in prison just means the criminal is still around to haunt the victim. A death sentence brings finality to a horrible chapter in the lives of these family members.
3. It creates another form of crime deterrent. Prison time is an effective deterrent, but not as effective as Capital punishment. 
4. Justice is better served. The most fundamental principle of justice is that the punishment should fit the crime. When someone plans and brutally murders another person, it make sense that the punishment for the perpetrator also should be death. This can also follow similar logic as the social contract theory.
5. A response to the racial stigma attached to Capital Punishment. According to Roger Clegg (JD) in an article entitled “The Color of Death: Does the Death Penalty Discriminate?” He maintains that the reason minorities are disproportionately represented in those on Death row is because they commit more crimes. He cites Randall Kennedy, an African American professor of law at Harvard as saying that there is a higher rate of street crime in terms of minorities. He further goes on to say that criminals are disproportionate in a number of other arenas, such as the majority on death row being males, in their 20’s, and poor. He also goes on to show that crime rates are much higher for the poor than for other socioeconomic groups, and links the fact that minorities are more highly represented in the poor.
6. Our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims. It's time we put the emphasis of our criminal justice system back on protecting the victim rather than the accused. Remember, a person who's on death row has almost always committed crimes before this. A long line of victims have been waiting for justice. We need justice for current and past victims.
7. It provides a deterrent for prisoners already serving a life sentence. What about people already sentenced to life in prison. What's to stop them from murdering people constantly while in prison? What are they going to do--extend his sentence? Sure, they can take away some prison privileges, but is this enough of a deterrent to stop the killing? What about a person sentenced to life who happens to escape? What's to stop him from killing anyone who might try to bring him in or curb his crime spree?
8. DNA testing and other methods of modern crime scene science can now effectively eliminate almost all uncertainty as to a person's guilt or innocence. One of the biggest arguments against the death penalty is the possibility of error. Sure, we can never completely eliminate all uncertainty, but nowadays, it's about as close as you can get. DNA testing is over 99 percent effective. And even if DNA testing and other such scientific methods didn't exist, the trial and appeals process is so thorough it's next to impossible to convict an innocent person. Remember, a jury of 12 members must unanimously decide there's not even a reasonable doubt the person is guilty. The number of innocent people that might somehow be convicted is no greater than the number of innocent victims of the murderers who are set free.
9. Prisoner parole or escapes can give criminals another chance to kill. Perhaps the biggest reason to keep the death penalty is to prevent the crime from happening again. The parole system nowadays is a joke. Does it make sense to anyone outside the legal system to have multiple "life" sentences + 20 years or other jiverish? Even if a criminal is sentenced to life without possibility of parole, he still has a chance to kill while in prison, or even worse, escape and go on a crime/murder spree.
10. It contributes to the problem of overpopulation in the prison system. Prisons across the country face the problem of too many prisoners and not enough space & resources. Each additional prisoner requires a portion of a cell, food, clothing, extra guard time, and so on. When you eliminate the death penalty as an option, it means that prisoner must be housed for life. Thus, it only adds to the problem of an overcrowded prison system.
11. It gives prosecutors another bargaining chip in the plea bargain process, which is essential in cutting costs in an overcrowded court system. The number of criminal cases that are plea bargained (meaning the accused admits guilt in return for a lesser sentence or some other concession) can be as high as 80 or 90 percent of cases. With the time, cost, and personnel requirements of a criminal case, there really isn't much of a choice. The vast majority of people that are arraigned are in fact guilty of the crime they are accused. Even if you believe a defendant only deserves life in prison, without the threat of a death sentence, there may be no way to get him to plead guilty and accept the sentence. If a case goes to trial, in addition to the enormous cost, you run the chance that you may lose the case, meaning a violent criminal gets off scot free. The existence of the death penalty gives prosecutors much more flexibility and power to ensure just punishments.
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=4&did=2182661291&SrchMode=1&sid=2&Fmt=3&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&R
http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=002000
No comments:
Post a Comment