More Reasons for Capital Punishment

Arguments For:
  1. In one year in New York 85% of those arrested for murder had been arrested for murder before
  2. Prison is a bad sollution- it is hugely expensive and it basically means that the non-criminals citizens are paying for the food and maintenance of the criminals
  3. Its simply right that people should receive as a penalty what they have done to others. It is a basic principle of justice "an eye for an eye".
  4. Even in the heat of the moment, if it is understood that death will be the inevitable result of murder, a potential murderer will think twice. Criminals weigh costs and benefits just like anyone else.
  5. The Bible: Gen ( 9:4-6 Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man his blood will be shed")
    Ex21:12 (cf vs14 , Lev24:17, Num 35:30-40, Deut 17:6-7, 19:4-13,) Whoever strikes a man so that he dies will be put to death
  6. Jesus reaffirmed the law (SEE LINK)
  7. Mat 5:21-22 You have heard it said "you shall not kill" and "anyone who kills shall be brought to judgment ( capital punishment) but I say to you if anyone is angry with his brother he will be brought into judgement.
  8. Rom 13 the ruler does not bear the sword in vain. (what are swords for if not executions)
  9. Deterrance : the Ehrlich study in American economic review showed "an additional execution per year may have resulted in between 8 and 9 fewer murders"
  10. Common sense tells us that the death penalty would deter.
  11. The bible on deterance "then the people will see and fear"- DP does deter.
  12. Most people in Western countries support the death penalty Ec June 21 97 p60 ( in the US its low point was 42% of population in 1960s , today 79% support it)
Comments on Arguments Against:
  1. Argument : Death Penalty is Barbaric

    Now that many US states have switched to lethal injection, death is painless. Tolerance of inocent victims killed is surely more barbaric.

  2. Argument : Death penalty is used in a discriminatory manner

    In nations where this is the case it should be corrected so that the penalty is predictable and automatic for certain offences. This is not an argument against the DP but for its better use.

  3. Argument : Innocent person executed by mistake.

    This possibility can be greatly reduced by making at least two witnesses necessary for a conviction and by making the same penalties apply to false witnesses as apply to the accused if convicted ie a police officer who lies to get a man convicted would himself be put to death if this was discovered. In this scenario no one is framed because the costs of doing so are too high. Hugh Bedau (who opposes DP )has analysed the 7000 executions between 1893 and 1971 in the US and concludes that the record fails to show that such cases occur.

    Where there has been trials of the above that could have led to DP but were caught in time it is usually due to racism or police corruption which the laws against false witnesses eliminate ( no matter how corrupt you are you aren't going to run the risk of your own death to wrongly accuse someone else.)

    In the event that such an event did occur the final court of appeal is the judgement seat of God where we can be completely sure that perfect justive will finally be done.

  4. Argument : DP cheapens the value of human life Rather it stengthens it as it protects the human life of the future innocent victims of the murderer and also because the penalty for taking away human life is set so high.
  5. Argument : No possibility for repentance and evangelism If a man doesn't repent when there is sentence of death upon him then it is hardly likely he will do so in prison. When Jesus spoke to the repentant thief on the cross he gave the man salvation but he didn't release him from his punishment.
  6. Argument : US Supreme Court 1972 : As actually carried out , it was capricious and random If in a particular time and place capital punishment is not visited in all similar cases in a similar way then this should be dealt with. It must be always applied to premeditated, intentional murder no other penalty must ever be applied. Background must never be an issue as plenty of people from the same backgrounds never commit the offenses. First offense must be no excuse. Justice must be predictable and non-random.

    Jurors should only be asked to determine guilt or innocence , the penalty should be known in advance, there should be no possibility of life imprisonment. Fundamentally there is no need then for the legal issues to be complex so the skills of the lawers should not overly affect the outcome except to ensure all the evidence is seen so verdict is the correct one. In the middle east where penalties are tough there is a very low crime rate (Economist Sep 13th 97) 2/3rds of those executed are foreign Sometimes crusifiction then firing squad (as for two convicted serial killers in Abu Dhabi) In the Phillipines they banned the DP in 87 but by 93 it was back for 13 crimes. Breakdown in the social ordere was the explanation.