While most are in opposition of captial punishment, there are some who still believe in that the death penalty is a functional part of a judicial system.
If you find yourself in discussion with someone who want these killings to go ahead, and you want to #standformercy, The Weekly, inspired by arguments put forward by Amnesty International, has come up with five things to say:
When supporters of the death penalty say we need to be “tough on crime.”
There is no doubt that punishments must be handed out when someone commits a crime. The function of our prisons and rehabilitation centres is to do just that, but there is little evidence to support the statement that the death penalty effects crime rates in any meaningful way.
A better indicator is to look at socio-economic factors that contribute to crime rates, as well as taking into account that those committing crimes don’t often think about getting caught. When you consider these aspects of the argument, it becomes clear that the backing behind the death penalty is unsubstantiated.
In the US – where the death penalty still is in place – a study published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology found that 88 per cent of the country’s top criminologists do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent to homicide, and 87 per cent of the expert criminologists believe that abolition of the death penalty would not have any significant effect on murder rates.
The only effective way of impacting crime rates is effective discussion and research into causes, a functional policing system and practical and efficient rehabilitation services.
When supporters of the death penalty say: “They did the crime, they should do the time.”
The irony of this statement is that, if the death penalty is interposed, the prisoner would not ‘do the time’ at all.
The death penalty eliminates any chance for prisoner rehabilitation. Allowing prisoners to rehabilitate themselves and those around them is the most effective the judicial system can be.
Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran are both examples of this, with Mr Sukumaran leading arts classes and Mr Chan training to be a pastor – both are excellent examples of rehabilitation.
In fact a, former prison governor of Kerobokan, Bapak Siswanto, surprised everyone when he came to court in 2010 and asked the court to spare Myuran and Andrew because execution would be a waste of their lives.
When supporters of the death penalty say: “The criminal justice system is fair.”
Yes, Australia’s justice system is fair, but part of the reason that it is, is because we have already abolished capital punishment.
Countries still adhering to the death penalty do not have fair judicial systems. Studies have shown that the groups most affected by the death penalty are the working class, ethnic minorities and other marginalised sectors, because they can’t afford proper legal advisors.
When a qualified and skilled lawyer is representing, minute details are more likely to be explored, evidence double-checked and witnesses vetted.
According to Amnesty international “all of this makes a difference to whether a death sentence is handed down.”
Killing a human being will never be fair.
When supporters of the death penalty say: “It is cheaper and more humane to execute people.”
One of the most popular misconceptions is that executing someone is cheaper than upholding a life sentence. This is – unsurprisingly – false. A Californian study showed that is actually cheaper to keep a person in jail for life, than it is to execute them.
Californian judge Donald McCartin, who is nicknamed The hanging Judge of Orange County, told Forbes: “It’s 10 times more expensive to kill them then to keep them alive”.
Forbes also reports that most American states remain mum on the cost of lethal injections because of privacy concerns from pharmaceutical companies, but the Texas Department of Criminal Justice reportedly put the cost of their lethal cocktails at $83 million in 2011.
And almost consistently, outside costs of capital cases are higher with the legal avenues more expensive than non-capital cases.
In the US Fox News has reported that studies have “uniformly and conservatively shown that a death-penalty trial costs $1 million more than one in which prosecutors seek life without parole.”
Moreover, money should never be an issue when discussing taking someone’s life.
When supporters of the death penalty say: “But shouldn’t we execute [insert name of horrible despot here]?”
There is no honour in joining the ranks of murder. Those who have done unspeakable things should be punished for those things, but should we have to lower ourselves down to their level to exact ‘justice’? Or should we leave murder to murderers, and prove that there is never a good or justifiable reason for killing a human being?
