1 of 47

Unjust

Write now Article Tools

Is the death penalty justice? No. It is vengeance - plain and simple.

What is the purpose of the justice system?

In medieval times, the justice system did one of two things. It fined criminals for the enrichment of the king... or it killed them. Jails were too expensive and few people were imprisoned for any length of time.

In the 1830's, Alexis de Tocqueville traveled to America and wrote his famous book Democracy in America. However, he came to study something more mundane - prison reform. Americans were beginning to implement a wonderful new idea - the penitentiary.

In this system, prisoners were housed in prisons, held to strict moral codes, and rehabilitated. It is a clear departure from the old European method of execution, and it certainly foreshadows today's goal - to rehabilitate criminals.

What does the death penalty achieve?

The death penalty can never rehabilitate a criminal. It simply isn't designed to do it. Instead of attempting to make someone a productive member of society, it kills them.

The death penalty is designed at odds with the rest of the justice system. It aims to provide vengeance and closure for victims - not to rehabilitate criminals.

Arguments Against

Of course, some would argue that certain criminals are beyond rehabilitation. If violent rapists and murderers can never become productive members of society, why not just kill them?

A major argument against the death penalty in this case is that it is applied unequally. The 1987 Supreme Court case McClesky v. Kemp provided data showing that in southern courts, blacks that committed crimes against whites were far more likely to receive the death penalty than whites that committed crimes against whites. Since then, there have been repeated studies showing the capricious and unequal application of capital punishment.

In addition, there is always the possibility that a criminal is not guilty. Criminals are investigated, judged, and sentenced by humans - who are fallible. Every year, cases of false convictions come to light. If a man is in prison, he can be set free. If he has been killed, there's no recourse.

What Else Could Be Done?

There is a perfectly acceptable alternative - life imprisonment. It provides an answer for all of these contingencies.

Although a criminal wouldn't be eligible for parole, he or she would still be able to be rehabilitated from prison. While in the confines of a prison it is possible to be a productive member of society - reading, writing, creating art, etc.

By standardizing sentencing for these types of crimes, one possibility for unequal treatment is eliminated. There is still the possibility that prosecutions and convictions are impacted by the race or identity of the accused - but no one will be put to death at the hands of subconscious racism.

Sentencing a criminal to life imprisonment also leaves open the possibility for vindication. If at any time - 10, 20, 30 years after the conviction - new evidence is found that exonerates the convicted person, he or she can simply be set free. Nothing irreversible has been done.

Bottom Line

The death penalty is out of line with the philosophy of the American justice system. Rehabilitation is the goal - not vengeance. Life imprisonment is a superior form of punishment, because it allows a criminal to be a productive member of society, it prevents some unequal treatment, and it allows for exonerations.

It preserves the rights of the accused without trampling on the rights of the victims.

Learn more about this author, B. Rock.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Is the death penalty just or unjust??
We want to hear your view. Write now!