All of this is happening at the same time in history when many of the nations of the world have, or are in the process of, banning the death penalty. The U.S.A. is the only Western democracy that has retained capital punishment. This puts us into the select company with Iran, Iraq, China and, at the moment Russia. All but twelve of the fifty-one states in the United States currently have a capital punishment statute on the books. Texas executes, by far the majority of all convicts killed, while nine Southern states: Arkansas, Alabama, Florida, Texas, Virginia, Georgia, North Carolina, Louisiana and Missouri account for over 80 % of all executions.

With this growing popularity of capital punishment, the question must be addressed: Does capital punishment work ? Why do we do it ? Does an execution accomplish the objectives that our society wishes to establish for itself ? When one evaluates the plusses and minuses of capital punishment it is usually done under one or more of five reasons which can be given in favor of the death penalty. I propose to examine each of these reasons.

FIRST: Incapacitation; the death penalty incapacitates the convicted person in a way that no other form of punishment can ever do. The most basic justification for capital punishment is that the only way to make sure that murderers don’t murder again is to kill them and forever remove their ability to murder. Tougher sentencing laws make this argument is weaker than it was, say death penalty opponents. But, say proponents, murderers can still murder while in prison.

What is overlooked, is that as the death penalty exists at this present time, killers are put into a prison for a lengthy period of time before they are executed. Do they, in fact commit more murder ? The death penalty, today, is still chiefly a symbolic threat. The huge majority of murderers are not sentenced to death. The 1995 executions amounted to 2% of the entire death row population. There are claims. also, by Civil Rights organizations, that the death penalty is unevenly administered and is often racially motivated.

SECOND; Deterrence; Theargument that the death penalty will stop other potential killers from killing. The deterrence argument is perhaps the most often cited as the justification for the death penalty. The threat of death, this argument states, deters future capital crimes far more effectively than does the prospect of imprisonment, even imprisonment for life. A 1986 Gallup poll shows that 61 % of all Americans believe that the death penalty deters murderers, and 33% said deterrence was the main reason for supporting the death penalty. Politicians, [ e.g. Newt Gingrich and George Pitaki} have insisted that the death penalty "saves lives" . Experts in the field of criminology and human behavior, on the other hand, have studied this issue for decades. Most murders are unplanned, and no deterrence will stop them. Some suicide oriented people will copy a crime for which a criminal has been executed. There is actually a rise in the precise crime after the execution. As far back as World War II, wardens in Alcatraz, Sing -Sing [ Lawes] and many other large prisons in America spoke and wrote that the death penalty was not a deterrent, and they were against it.

Studies have been conducted which will show the death penalty acting as a deterrent, but these studies, for the most part, have been refuted by further, and more careful research. If the threat of execution were truly a deterrent, say critics, murder rates should be lower in those states that aggressively pursue capital punishment. But, in fact, the capital punishment state murder rate was 7.5 per 100,000 while the states without capital punishment average only 7.4.

Few law enforcement officials put much stock in the deterrence argument. A 1995 poll of police chiefs put he death penalty last in a list of ways of curbing violent crimes; putting it behind such others as : curbing drug abuse, more police on the streets, making prosecution easier, and making judges more responsible.

3, THIRD: Expense The death penalty is cheaper than life imprisonment. Regardless of its deterrent value, many favor the death penalty over life imprisonment because they are reluctant to spend tax dollars on a killer’s room and board for life. But, when the actual costs are added up, the death penalty turns out to be more expensive than life imprisonment, mainly because lawyers cost much more than prison guards. At, present, estimates are that in Texas and Florida, the states with the most executions, costs per execution run between $ 2.16 to $3.2 million per execution. This is about six times the cost of a lengthy life imprisonment. Even the provision in the new anti-terrorism measure passed by Congress, limiting the number of appeals allowed, will not significantly reduce capital punishment costs. While we are acting inhumanely, we must preserve the humane facade.

When this cost information becomes known and understood, the 72% pro-death penalty support often drops to about 56%.

4. FOURTH Justice: Execution is the only appropriate punishment for a murderer. There are some crimes that are so bad that society has the right to punish them with the ultimate sanction, says this argument. The punishment fits the crime as it were. At issue here is the age long argument between the two differing views of justice: retributive and distributive. Retributive justice insists that when a wrong is committed by a person a wrong of equal or like degree should be imposed upon the perpetrator. An ‘;eye of an eye, tooth for a tooth, life for a life’. This is called the "Lex Talionis" and stems as far back as Hammurabi’s Law Code around 1770 BCE. It has been the basis for ‘fair’ judgment and punishment ever since. What is not usually noticed is that just a few lines down on that same Law Code, we find the basis for the other form of justice, distributive justice. This justice says, that whatever situation existed before the wrong was done should be restored as nearly as possible. While this type of justice is easier to apply in a crime affecting material goods rather than lives, it may mediate against the death penalty.

Perhaps we need to spend more effort in a focus on the victims of a capital crime and how the one who committed the crime can help set things right, and less time on ‘getting even’ we might move forward.

5 FIFTH Vengeance ;This is the argument with no rebuttal. Revenge is the one argument for which there is no rational, cognitive answer, because the argument is irrational. Revenge is so deeply rooted in our society that for man persons the arguments used in the other four reasons don’t apply.

An ‘eye for an eye’ becomes " I want the killer’s life for my loss" or " nothing less than the death of this person will satisfy me Often, today, we see the spectacle of the victim’s next of kin wanting to be a witness at the execution of the killer . This argument is so emotional that it refuses to become rational. The sates in which the majority of executions take place are filled with " good Christian

people " who quote the Hebrew Scripture quite well. It does little good to remind these people that every major religion of the world, reserve vengeance to its deity. "Vengeance id mine" says your God. " Judge not, lest ye be judged", God tells His Christian children.

Unfortunately, persons who focus so steadfastly on vengeance usually neglect the healing processes which are needed by others close to the crime, and, in the long run, suffer longer and more intensely than an person who is able to free him/herself from the event, and mourn. When a person hates another to the extent of wanting vengeance, one is attached to that person. The only road to freedom is forgiveness.

COPYRIGHT © 1977 BY ROBERT T. MASON All Rights Reserved