No justice served with the death penalty!

The second course in the humanities sequence for junior year is called A Nation’s Argument. In this class, we focused on the structure of an argument, as well as looking back at historical arguments that were used to shape this nation. The third unit of this class was called “1964” because we looked back at what caused our nation to change during the Civil Rights era. For the action project, we were asked to create a synthesis to transcend a contradiction, just as the Civil Rights Act was a response to opposing views on race and equality. We were to take a position on a controversial topic, as well as look at the opposing side to see what they had to say about the issue. In the end, we created a synthesis to bring these two sides to an understanding and,hopefully, a way beyond the contradiction.I decided to address the controversy that surrounds the death penalty,and explain my stance on this issue. I hope you enjoy hearing what I have to say and learning about the topic through my idea for synthesis.

Thesis:

The death penalty has been talked about for many years, with many countries either supporting it or not. I personally do not support it and argue for the abolition of the death penalty. When people hear me say that, they usually get the wrong message, which is that I believe criminals should be saved from suffering. In fact, I do want the murderer/criminal to suffer and pay the price of their wrongdoing, which is why I want them to live the rest of their life in a cell. If they're put to death, their suffering ends in an instant. Instead of the death penalty, there should be a law that requires prison inmates who committed horrendous acts to be put to hard labor.

Munilla, Miguel, Luis. "The death penalty is not justice". Flickr. Yahoo!. 2, July. 2010. web. 16 March 2016. 

Evidence to support my thesis:
Aside from ending the suffering of criminals faster, we also pay way more in taxes to put criminals on death row. When someone is sentenced with the death penalty,the cost to taxpayers is 20 times more expensive than the trials that seek a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole (Factslide.com). Rather than all the money going towards the death penalty, those funds could go to the family of the victim. Additionally, there was a study conducted by a law professor at the University of Michigan who discovered that 4% of convicts on death row were and are most likely innocent. People are killed for no reason sometimes and by keeping the death penalty, the government is just contradicting itself. Furthermore, a lot of inmates on death row are picked because of race on both ends.An African American who murders a white person, is most likely chosen to be sentenced to the death penalty. Which goes against the Constitution's promise of equal protection for all people.You also have to think about the horrible conditions that prisoners live in. They’re stuck in a cell and following rules their whole lives. When they die they don’t have to go through that suffering anymore. They get put to sleep via lethal injection, which is one of the most peaceful ways to die. Criminals also have the time to gather a will, say goodbye to their family, and even request a certain meal. That’s all something a victim is not able to do, so why should a criminal?

Below are quotes that support my argument.
“Life in prison is a worse punishment and a more effective deterrent. For those of you who don't feel much sympathy for a murderer, keep in mind that death may be too good for them. With a death sentence, the suffering is over in an instant. With life in prison, the pain goes on for decades. Prisoners are confined to a cage and live in an internal environment of rape and violence where they're treated as animals”.

                                                                                                                                                               

                                                                                                               - Joe Messerli

                                                                                                           Balanced Politics.org, “Death Penalty”

"[T]here is no credible evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than long terms of imprisonment. States that have death penalty laws do not have lower crime rates or murder rates than states without such laws. And states that have abolished capital punishment show no significant changes in either crime or murder rates. The death penalty has no deterrent effect. Claims that each execution deters a certain number of murders have been thoroughly discredited by social science research."

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)

"The Death Penalty: Questions and Answers," ACLU.org

Apr. 9, 2007

"Despite the fact that African Americans make up only 13 percent of the nation’s population, almost 50 percent of those currently on the federal death row are African American. And even though only three people have been executed under the federal death penalty in the modern era, two of them have been racial minorities. Furthermore, all six of the next scheduled executions are African Americans. The U.S. Department of Justice’s own figures reveal that between 2001 and 2006, 48 percent of defendants in federal cases in which the death penalty was sought were African Americans… the biggest argument against the death penalty is that it is handed out in a biased, racially disparate manner."

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)

"NAACP Remains Steadfast in Ending Death Penalty & Fighting Injustice in America's Justice System,” NAACP website

June 28, 2007

Antithesis:
The opposing side to my argument is that some criminals should be sentenced to the death penalty. Some families like seeing the murderer being put to death, as it gives the family some sort of closure. Some also think the idea of death scares everyone, so why not scare these criminals? The main opposer of my argument is Hugo Bedau, a philosophy professor who’s best known for his work with capital punishment. In 1982 he remarked, “Think-if every murderer who killed someone died instantly, the homicide rate would be very low because no one likes to die. We cannot do this, but if the Justice system can make it more swift and severe, we could change the laws to make capital punishment faster and make appeals a shorter process. The death penalty is important because it could save the lives of thousands of potential victims who are at stake.” I understand where he is coming from, but keeping someone in prison without parole, also works as keeping criminals away from potential victims.

Wikicommens. "The lethal injection room at San Quntin State Prison". 3 August 2011. 

Synthesis:
Both sides of the death penalty debate want criminals to be punished and to experience some suffering. The suffering won’t be as close to what victims had to go through, but these criminals should remain haunted by what they have done. Both sides also want these criminals off the streets for good.

The synthesis that would bring these two opposing sides toward an understanding would require that the prison system become an even harsher experience for those who might have been sentenced to death. Instead of the death penalty, these criminals should be put to hard labor, giving them a taste of pain.

Conservative.com "Prison-bars". 

Citations:

"History and Debate of Death Penalty." Death Penalty Debate. Debate.org, n.d. Web. 18 Mar. 2016.

Messerli, Joe. "Should the Death Penalty Be Banned as a Form of Punishment?" BalancedPolitics.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Mar. 2016

"33 Facts about The Death Penalty ←FACTSlides→." Death Penalty Facts:. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Mar. 2016.

"DEATH PENALTY ARGUMENTS." DEATH PENALTY ARGUMENTS. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Mar.

2016.