3. LEARN ABOUT THE ARGUMENTS AGAINST CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
"The death penalty is racially biased against African Americans."
The Argument: Statistical evidence conducted on cases of similar crimes found that African American defendants are over four times as likely to be executed as their White counterparts. A similar study noted that White defendants face almost no chance of execution when their victim is African-American. While African Americans make up only 13% of the U.S. population, over 40% of death-row inmates are African-American. In light of these gross inequalities, the continuation of capital punishment constitutes egregious discrimination.
The Response: Statistical surveys that purport to show racial inequalities in applications of the death penalty ignore the socioeconomic and crime-pattern differences. Although it is true that a disproportionate number of those executed are African Americans, it is also true that those on death row come disproportionately from low-income and high-crime geographic areas. That such areas are disproportionately populated by African Americans is a tragic correlation, painting a troubling portrait of a nation that lacks equality. But it is wrong and naive to hold the death penalty itself responsible for this injustice. The Supreme Court ruled as such in McCleskey v. Kemp (1987), rejecting the notion that this type of statistical evidence could be used to invalidate the death penalty.
"Mistakes can be made."
The Argument: Advances in forensic medicine and DNA testing are leading to more and more exonerations of convicted criminals. For example, the Innocence Project, organized by attorneys Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld, has reviewed hundreds of such cases, and secured the release of at least eight innocent prisoners. Even absent such technology it is always possible that new evidence will surface to prove an inmate's innocence. The carrying out of a punishment that cannot be reversed shows a confidence in our legal system that is not justified. Numerous cases have arisen where police or others were found to have lied or planted evidence, or where a trial was administered incorrectly, or where a simple case of mistaken identity occurred. Until we can prove that justice is being administered impartially and with a degree of nearly perfect certainty, there should be no such thing as an irreversible punishment. If this means never, then so be it.
The Response: While the criminal justice system is not perfect, it operates within a degree of certainty acceptable to the average law-abiding citizen. If no system of justice can be administered without perfect certainty of guilt, then the majority of criminals will go unpunished. The death penalty serves a legitimate punitive and deterrent effect on crime, and thus helps assure the continued safety of those who live within the law. The occasional execution of an innocent is a tragic event, one against which the system must be ever vigilant. But such errors are not inherent in the system itself, they are only the result of carelessness in its application. The remedy is not to dismantle the system, which would be detrimental to society, but to exercise even greater care in its administration.
"A government that imposes the death penalty is as bad as the murderer."
The Argument: Is it ever justified for a human (or government) to willingly take the life of another human? Isn't that what the killer did in the first place? Isn't the government just as bad as the killer? The Categorical Imperative says that one must act not based on utility but only on the ultimate values one embraces; if killing is evil, then it may not be done by anyone for any reason.
The Response: One of the foremost principles of freedom is "the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." When someone takes someone else's life, he/she has violated these fundamental rights, and thus has given up the right to his/her own. It is not evil for a society to act to promote the greater good; the ends justify the means, at least when it is a guilty party who is punished.
"America lags behind the rest of the world by failing to ban capital punishment."
The Argument: More than half the nations of the world (and all of the so-called "developed nations," except for the U.S.) have outlawed capital punishment. Last year, America executed roughly the same number of people as Iran, a nation constantly criticized for its human rights violations. In an era in which the United States is attempting to take the lead on universal rights and free democracy, how can it continue to promulgate a punishment deemed draconian by many of its allies? Further, the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the nation's foundational document, prohibits the infliction of "cruel and unusual punishment." What could be more cruel than the taking of a person's life, particularly, as is often the case, by means of a device as barbaric as the electric chair?
The Response: In many ways America's uniqueness with respect to other nations reflects its economic and political advantages. Other distinctions, however, are not quite so complimentary; for example, the U.S. has a dramatically higher rate of violent crime than that of the nations of Europe. As such, capital punishment is the necessary means to keep crime under control. Besides, if we really took our cues from Europe, we'd also have to call soccer "football" and install bidets in our bathrooms. America is a leader, not a follower, and even where we are in the wrong we will remain so stubbornly and spectacularly, until we decide otherwise. It's the American way.
