The death penalty, or capital punishment, is the harshest judicial decree available in 32 states, available nation-wide if sentenced in federal or military court. Many of the 18 states who chose not to have the death penalty available did so upon their induction into statehood.
While there are many reasons why people were put to death in the past, the current law of the land, the 8th Amendment, disallows cruel and unusual punishment for a crime. Since 1776, several court cases have had rulings interpreting this phrase, and the death penalty has been narrowed down to only be allowed in cases of aggravated murder, given that the murderer is mentally competent.
There are a number of ways in which one can be put to death, usually at the choice of the prisoner to be executed, including: Electrocution, hanging, gas chamber, firing squad, and (most popularly) lethal injections.
Now, why do we put people to death? A person is born at the behest of a being more than man (or woman). Is it just for a person, or group of people, to determine whether others’ actions are worthy of death?
Here is how I see it: We will say that a person decides to shoot a person in a phone booth. The person they shot has a spouse and other relatives. These relatives want justice for the death of their loved one. Some in the group may believe that the just punishment would be for themselves to be able to kill the murderer. This is not possible, legally. Since some of the relatives want blood and are not able to take it themselves, they allow a judge and jury to decide whether this person should die for their crime. If the court decides that the murderer is guilty and it is available for them to levy the death penalty and this penalty is chosen, the relatives of the person may feel as if justice has been served. Thus, the judge, jury, relatives, and all inhabitants of the state or country are vicariously killing a person through the hands of an executioner.
Why did the relatives want the murderer to die? Is it for closure? Would they have more closure if they were allowed to take the murderer’s life with their own hands?
I do not believe one can achieve closure through causing the death of one who killed their loved one. Rather, I believe that closure can be better achieved by keeping the murderer alive, imprisoned forever. How would this benefit the bereaved? It is my belief that their anger and bloodlust is caused by a deep unknowing of why the criminal acted the way they did at the time. It is also my belief that the criminal may not know why they acted as they did at the time and by cutting their life short, they may never understand why.
By keeping the prisoner alive, in time the murderer may realize why they acted as they did and possibly feel remorse for their actions. At the time of realization, the bereaved may be able to learn from the murderer why their relative was killed. This will possibly give the relatives some closure, to know why and that the killer does have remorse for their past actions and do fully realize why they are being punished.
A society which uses death as a penalty will promote others to use death as a form of punishment for any situation a person sees fit, whether it is that they were directly or indirectly harmed by the person they want to kill or whether it is a random act of hatred toward society.
I see life imprisonment as a more just punishment for murder, seeing as it is a punishment from the state. The state provides rights and freedoms to its citizens, but a supreme creator provides life, therefore the state should only be able to restrict what it provides and no more.
Do you believe it is just to sentence someone to death for the crime of aggravated murder? If not or if so, please comment below.
Paid for by Paul Vincent Catanese for President