Against Capital Punishment

"At 8:00 p.m. it was nearing the end of John Evans' last day on death row. He had spent most of the day with his minister and family, praying and talking of what was to come. At 8:20 he was walked from his cell down to the long hall to the execution room and strapped in the electric chair. At 8:30 p.m. the first jolt of 1900 volts passed through Mr. Evans' body. It lasted 30 seconds. Sparks and flames erupted from the electrode tied to Mr. Evans' leg. His body slammed against the straps holding him in the chair and his fist clenched permanently. The electrode then burst from the strap holding it in place. A large puff of gray smoke and sparks pored out from under the hood that covered his face. An overpowering stench of burnt flesh and clothing began pervading the witness room. Two doctors then examined Mr. Evans and declared that he was not dead.

The electrode was then refastened and Mr. Evans was given another 30-second jolt. The stench was nauseating. Again the doctors examined him and found his heart still beating. At this time the prison commissioner, who was talking on the line with Governor George Wallace of Alabama, was asked to cancel the execution on the grounds that Mr. Evans was being subje

Capital punishment goes against the morals and standards that our country is based upon. A punishment that inflicts harm on a person can hardly be good or moral if it is purposeless. A punishment may be given to a wrongdoer for one or a combination of the following reasons: (1) to protect the community from the criminal returning to previous activity, (2) to rehabilitate the offender; and (3) to restore the moral order breached by the violation. Capital punishment is not required to accomplish any of these purposes. Other alternatives work better or at least as well (Robinson, 1999, October 7). Killing is not the answer (Bender& Leone, 1987 p. 63). Recently some states have been implementing life without parole as an alternative to death. This has proven just a successful as the death penalty for punishment. It prevents criminals from returning to society, and is less expensive than capital punishment (Vila & Morris, 1997, p.255). Another study shows that over 80% of those serving life sentences will never commit another crime, and well over 80% will never again commit a capital offense (Bedau, 1999, November 10). These statistics clearly show that other forms of punishment are successful in the deterrence of crime and capital punishment is not needed.

Also, states with no death penalty had a lower average murder rate than those with a death penalty being 4.75 per 100,000 as compared to 6.8 per 100,000 (US Department of Justice, 1999, September 29). However, such a simple comparison can be misleading, because the states within each group have a broad range of murder rates, and there is also a good deal of overlap between rates in the two groups. These studies also imply that no factors other than the death penalty affect a state's murder rate. That is why most studies comparing homicide rates to executions rates are not accurate (Vila & Morris, 1997, p.278).

In Maryland, a comparison of capital trial costs for the years 1979-1984 concluded that a death penalty case costs around 42 percent more than a case resulting in a non-death sentence. In 1988 and 1989 the Kansas legislature voted against reinstating the death penalty after it was informed that reintroduction would involve a first year cost of more than $11 million. Also, Florida, which has one of the nation's largest death rows, has estimated that each execution costs around 3.2 million. This is approximately six times the cost of a life sentence. For these reasons capital punishment is not an affordable from of punishment (Bedau, 1999, November 10).

In 1975 two African American men in Florida, Freddie Pitts and Wilbert Lee, were released from prison after twelve years awaiting execution for the murder of two white men. Their convictions were the result of coerced confessions, erroneous testimony, and an alleged eyewitness. Though a white man eventually admitted his guilt, a nine-year legal battle was required before the governor would grant Pitts and Lee a pardon. Had there execution not been postponed for the legal battle, they would have been innocently put to death (Bedau, 1999, November 10).

One argument the supporters of the death penalty use is that it is a good deterrent of murder. In fact in a USA today poll, 68% of respondents agreed that the death penalty deters crime (Honeyman & Ogloff, 1999, September 29). However, current research suggests that rather than deterring homicide, state executions may actually increase the murder rate. This phenomenon has been named the " brutalization hypothesis." It suggests that through suggestion, modeling, or by legitimizing killing, homicide numbers increase. In a study taken from 1957 to 1982 by Isaac Ehrlich, t