Download pfd

Those who support the death penalty provide a number of arguments for its effectiveness that do not hold up under examination. Among these are: (1) the death penalty is a deterrent, (2) the death penalty provides just punishment to fit the crime of murder, (3) the death penalty provides closure for those close to people who have been killed, and (4) the death penalty is cheaper than life imprisonment. Some argue that extracting vengeance for a heinous act is adequate reason to execute those who have committed such an act. The facts, however, do not support these beliefs. Because of its clear inability to meet any of the most popular conceptions that support its continuation, the death penalty should be abolished.

(1)        The death penalty does not deter murder. In fact, the murder rates in states without the death penalty are slightly lower.

(2)        Many inmates are on death row through errors in justice.  Over 100 death row inmates have been released as a result of investigations by the Innocence Project and by the journalism schools at our universities.  Many death row inmates had poor representation or who were cleared after the introduction of DNA evidence. This tells us that defendants who can afford good lawyers are much more likely to be found not guilty. Although many public defenders are excellent, they have limited resources, and inexperienced private attorneys provide a poor defense for their clients. This is in clear violation of the equal protection clause in our Constitution.

(3)        Executions seldom provide “closure” for the victim’s family.  Interviews with family members reveal that executions rarely provides the anticipated relief, while the lengthy appeals process forces family members to relive the violence suffered by the victim, and prevents them from healing and moving on with their lives.

(4)        The death penalty is very expensive.  It costs over one million dollars extra for every case in which the district attorney seeks the death penalty. The trials are much longer, and they require additional resources for the prosecution, the defense, the court, and the local sheriff. These costs are borne by the counties that try the cases. The state then bears the costs of maintaining death rows and providing representation during the appeals process. We would save millions if the death penalty were replaced by permanent imprisonment. This money could be used for effective crime prevention measures, including solving more crimes, community outreach to reduce violence, and other essential purposes.

See the websites of the Death Penalty Information Center and the Innocence Project for more information.

- Thanks to Alex Madonik