Death Penalty
Steve Gardella
Position Paper #3
10/30/2012
Professor Lincoln Passmore (MWR 9:15-10:20)
The death penalty is a topic of much controversy in the modern world both on a personal level and a geopolitical level. There are many arguments for and against it but I feel that, though many people may and will disagree with me, there is a black and white correct answer, which I will discuss at the conclusion of this paper. Through history the death penalty has taken many incarnations: the gallows, the gas chamber, the firing squad, the electric chair and finally, to where most executions fall within today, the lethal injection. Using a punishment of death finds itself held up by many major solid arguments such as deterrence of criminal behavior, reduction of repeat offenders, and safety and retribution for the families of victims. Though there is no measurable way to acquire statistics on the deterrent effect of the death penalty, it would seem logical to assume that many crimes that could have been committed, were walked away from unfinished because of the fear of a potential punishment of death. Ernest van der Haag, a Fordham University professor of jurisprudence, explains deterrent qualities, as “Whatever people fear most is likely to deter most.” Looking at it from that angle, once again a reasonable person may be able to ascertain that death is the ultimate deterrent. In that vein, a 1973 study done by Isaac Ehrlich which employed a distinctive form of analysis showed results that for every inmate that was executed, 7 lives were spared to a death by murder due to the deterrent nature of the death penalty. Reduction of repeat offenders certainly finds its argument on grounds that are a bit more stable. According to Georgetown University constitutional law professor emeritus Walter Bern “The most defensible justification for capital punishment is incapacitation.” A man who commits a crime worthy of capital punishment and is executed unarguably cannot commit
Position Paper #3
10/30/2012
Professor Lincoln Passmore (MWR 9:15-10:20)
The death penalty is a topic of much controversy in the modern world both on a personal level and a geopolitical level. There are many arguments for and against it but I feel that, though many people may and will disagree with me, there is a black and white correct answer, which I will discuss at the conclusion of this paper. Through history the death penalty has taken many incarnations: the gallows, the gas chamber, the firing squad, the electric chair and finally, to where most executions fall within today, the lethal injection. Using a punishment of death finds itself held up by many major solid arguments such as deterrence of criminal behavior, reduction of repeat offenders, and safety and retribution for the families of victims. Though there is no measurable way to acquire statistics on the deterrent effect of the death penalty, it would seem logical to assume that many crimes that could have been committed, were walked away from unfinished because of the fear of a potential punishment of death. Ernest van der Haag, a Fordham University professor of jurisprudence, explains deterrent qualities, as “Whatever people fear most is likely to deter most.” Looking at it from that angle, once again a reasonable person may be able to ascertain that death is the ultimate deterrent. In that vein, a 1973 study done by Isaac Ehrlich which employed a distinctive form of analysis showed results that for every inmate that was executed, 7 lives were spared to a death by murder due to the deterrent nature of the death penalty. Reduction of repeat offenders certainly finds its argument on grounds that are a bit more stable. According to Georgetown University constitutional law professor emeritus Walter Bern “The most defensible justification for capital punishment is incapacitation.” A man who commits a crime worthy of capital punishment and is executed unarguably cannot commit