Luke Schilling

Capital Punishment Is Ineffective

Over recent years, there has been much controversy surrounding the topic of Capital
Punishment. Should murderers be sentenced to death for what they have done? Is it morally
wrong? These are all questions that one may ask when this is brought to light. The answer to
this is no, for many reasons: the first being that it in fact does not deter people from committing
murder and is not setting a good example for citizens, contrary to popular belief it costs more to
charge a criminal with capital punishment, and third because of human error-innocent people
have and will be charged with capital punishment. All of these reasons point to one obvious
answer; capital punishment is not the way to go.
When someone commits a crime such as murder, it would almost make sense for that
person to be killed right? In theory, this would not only make sure this person doesnt have the
opportunity to murder again, but also eliminate this person altogether. Most would think this
sounds like a great idea. Unfortunately, its the complete opposite. Everyone has heard of the
phrase lead by example, right? How can society expect to lower the murder rate, when we
murder the murderers? Tifft made a valid point in his article when he says the legitimization
model suggests that the presence of authorized or sanctioned killing during war has a residual
effect on the level of homicide in peacetime society (Tifft 64.) What this quote shows is
that, sanctioned or unsanctioned, murder is murder. This simply opens peoples eyes to violence.
When something such as this takes place in front of someone, this has a huge impact on them.
They begin to see death as commonplace- it becomes more socially accepted- and when this
happens, the murder rate therefore increases.

Some may say that this is nonsense, and that people do in fact have control over
themselves, and their actions. This is wrong. People are extremely sensitive to the surroundings
around them, and do in fact look up to the government and powers above them. If the
government accepts capital punishment as such an acceptable punishment, this will change
societies view on murder as a whole; if the murderers get murdered for their crimes, what does
this resolve? Nothing. Smith, from Tiffts writing, says the taking of a human life is an evil in
itself and should be endured only for a greater good. It is incumbent on the advocates of the
death penalty to prove that positive social effects will result from its use. Failure to demonstrate
such effects should compel us to avoid use of an irrevocable penalty. (Smith, Tifft 64.)
Capital punishment advocates may still argue that in order to prove positive effects that
this punishment needs to be applied to capital offenses. Advocates would stress for the use of
the 3,000 executions experiment. (Tifft 64.) This idea is wrong. In order to do such an
experiment, Smith says, in Tiffts article, that the data would show that by taking so many lives
the state expands the acceptability of killing, undermines the value of life in general, and sets a
poor example for its subjects. (Tifft 64.)
Not only is capital punishment not effective in lowering the homicide rate and sets a bad
example for citizens, it also costs substantially more than the traditional method of permanent
imprisonment. According to www.deathpenalty.org California taxpayers pay $90,000 more
per death row prisoner each year than on prisoners in regular confinement. This equates to a
total of $1 billion over a span of five years. (www.deathpenalty.org) The money saved by
replacing capital punishment could be used to reform the social problems that in fact cause
things such as murder. If we could provide more social programs to help reform those who show
signs of need, then we could lower the murder rate, without capital punishment.

My third and final reason capital punishment should not be enacted in our justice system
is because of human error. Van Den Haag wrote about a survey by Professors Hugo Adam
Bedau and Micheal Radelet. These professors found that in the United States alone we as a
nation had executed 7,000 people between the years 1990 and 1985, 25 of these people executed
were innocent. (Van Den Haag 302.) Not only is capital punishment not necessary because of
reasons already stated, but also because it is taking innocent lives. What some people dont
understand is the finality of capital punishment; once you take the life of someone there is no
going back.
Some still may argue that this collateral damage is worth it in a sense. Van Den Haag
does a good job illustrating this idea, despite precautions, nearly all human activities, such as
trucking, lighting, or construction, cost the lives of some innocent bystanders. We do not give up
these activities, because the advantages, moral or material, outweigh the unintended losses.
This idea for capital punishment does not shine through; simply because capital punishment is
not effective. Essentially, what capital punishment does is displace the murders. A man by
the name of Phillips in Tiffts article shows this: He says Phillips found that homicides
decreased in the week and the week after highly publicized executions. However, following this
two-week decline, Phillips found that the drop in homicides was cancelled by an equally large
rise in homicides. (Tifft 63.) This once again proves the ineffectiveness of capital punishment.
Capital punishment is without a doubt the United States most harsh and unnecessary
punishment. There is little to no benefit for this punishment other than the small window period
when the murder rate falls, but is then cancelled out by an equal rise in homicide rates in the
following weeks. Capital punishment sounds good on paper, but once you break it down, it
becomes clear; it is ineffective. This is made evident since that it is in fact not effective in

deterring people from murder and makes people more prone to murder-since it becomes such
common place in a society that enforces capital punishment, it costs more than permanent
imprisonment, and because of human error. We cannot afford to lose any more innocent lives,
spend more money, and enforcing a punishment that doesnt directly benefit us as a nation. It is
time to put an end to this outrageous punishment, and start looking for some more effective ways
to deter people from committing crimes such as murder.

Works Cited
Van Den Haag, Ernest. The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense.
Tifft, Larry. Capital Punishment Research, Policy, and Ethics: Defining Murder and Placing
Murderers.
Death Penalty. Web. Sacramento Bee, 1988. 15 Oct 2014.
<http://www.deathpenalty.org/article.php?id=42>.