Financial Facts About the Death Penalty, Essay Example

The use of the death penalty in the United States is an outdated practice. Although many individuals that believe criminals deserve to die as punishment for committing crimes, many states have rules these practices to be illegal due to the humanitarian concerns that putting individuals to death raise. Reports have shown that a variety of the death methods used are not only painful to the victim, but expensive. In addition, studies have demonstrated that it is more financially feasible to keep a criminal in prison for life than to commit them to the death penalty. Thus, to address both humanitarian and financial concerns, it is not feasible to continue use of the death penalty in the United States.

Historically, states that implemented the death penalty allowed a variety of methods to be used to put criminals to death. One of the most notorious and painful methods was believed to be the electric chair, in which criminals would be electrocuted to death. To maintain ethical standards, many states implemented the use of the lethal injection, which they believed would silently and painlessly put criminals to death. However, studies have shown that these methods are not as painless as expected. In addition, many states are utilizing experimental substances for lethal injections to cut costs. In April 2014,

“The state of Oklahoma accidentally killed a man in the middle of trying to execute him. Clayton Lockett, 38, died of a heart attack about 40 minutes after the first drug in the state’s new, top-secret, three-drug lethal injection protocol was administered. According to press reports, after the first drug in the previously untried cocktail was administered, Lockett was briefly unconscious, then began “writhing and bucking” on the gurney” (Lithwick, 2014).

Clayton Lockett had been accused of shooting a 19-year old girl with a shotgun and then watching two accomplices bury her alive. This was the fourth felony he had committed. In a copy of his case documentation, Lockett reportedly claimed “IN REALITY I AM PROBABLY THE MOST DANGEROUS TYPE OF CRIMINAL”… “CAUSE IM AN ASSASSIAN – POINT BLANK!” (Pruitt, 1999). He was charged for kidnapping, breaking and entering, murder, and rape, among other charges.

In spite of Lockett’s crimes, he was forced to suffer from a painful and unintentional death. The Oklahoma government was using 100 grams of a drug named midazolam for the first time as a combination drug during this procedure. After this event, the government ceased carrying out death penalty convictions temporarily to determine how to prevent the painful death that had occurred to Lockett. Even though criminals like Lockett are intended to die, they have the right to a painless death. In this instance, it is evident that Oklahoma breached this requirement.

Furthermore, it is important to consider the expense associated with the death penalty. “Cases without the death penalty cost $740,000, while cases where the death penalty is sought cost $1.26 million” (Death Penalty Information Center, 2015). In Lockett’s case, the death penalty ended up costing more money due to the need to assess the failure of the lethal injection and to develop more effective plans for future inmates. Therefore, it is apparent that the death penalty is not only a breach of human rights, it is expensive. It is more realistic to allow an individual to remain in prison for life than it is to incur costs related to the end of life legal requirements and lethal injection costs.

Ultimately, it does not appear that states implement the death penalty in a fair manner. In addition to the aforementioned concerns, it disproportionately impacts minorities. In 2009, 41.58% of death row inmates were black (NAACP, 2009). It is therefore important to consider that racial implications may play a role in the tendency for individuals to be convicted in a manner that results in the implementation of the death penalty. In addition, it is important to consider that the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime. In one example, North Carolina’s murder rate declined after the death penalty was overturned (NCCADP, 2015). Similar impacts were seen in other states as well. Therefore, the severity of the crime does not prevent criminals from taking action. Since many individuals do not believe that they will be caught for committing such crimes, it is challenging for them to reason with the fact that they may potentially be subject to such treatment in the future.

Overall, it is beneficial to end the death penalty in all states because it is a demonstrated violation of human rights. Not only are the death penalty methods used unreliable and painful, individuals are more likely to be subject to the death penalty on the basis of skin color. Therefore, it is a discriminatory act as well. In addition, the death penalty is more expensive than allowing an individual to remain alive for life in prison, indicating that ending the death penalty will allow for the more effective spending of taxpayer dollars. Since continued implementation of the death penalty results in many social and economic disadvantages, it is reasonable to put an end to the death penalty to support human rights and take a step forward in the criminal justice system.

References

Death Penalty Information Center. (2015). Financial Facts About the Death Penalty. Retrieved from http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

NAACP. (2009). Racial Disparities. Retrieved from http://deathpenalty.org/article.php?id=54

NCCADP. (2015). Failure to Deter Crime. Retrieved from http://nccadp.org/issues/deterrence/

Pruitt, E.S. (1999). Clayton Lockett. Retrieved from http://www.ok.gov/oag/documents/Lockett%20Clemency%20brf.pdf