The death penalty here in the United States can also be known simply as ‘legislative murder.’ Capital punishment, specifically the death penalty, has been at a focal point within most political stances/ideologies. The death penalty can be defined as ‘the punishment of execution, administered to someone legally convicted of a capital crime’ (McGuigan). Most countries have utilized this technique of determent of crime by numerous different techniques that have honestly evolved with society itself. This paper will take the stance that the death penalty is an injustice of criminal punishment within the United States, and globally. The effectiveness of the death penalty has been outweighed as time went on, leading it up to more ambiguity. By eliminating the killing of criminals, or otherwise know as "legislative murder," it will come with less ambiguity in regards to how the United States goes about crime determent (Allison).

Justifying the moral concept of killing an innocent object with the taking that person’s life is simple hypocrisy. The life of the criminal cannot compensate for the crime committed. The wrongs don’t make one right, basically. Those in favor of the death penalty argue that the more severe the crime, then the more severe the punishment is necessary. What becomes dubious, is trying to tell what is the most severe; life imprisonment or execution (McGuigan). No one can tell that, or even holds the qualifications to justify an answer to that. In short, having a government stand behind the notion that killing someone for killing another person is simply horrifying.

Furthermore, the ‘legislative murder’ being conducted in the United States can be seen as an injustice for hypocrisy. Like stated earlier, the killing of one person for killing another person isn’t a crime determent nor a way of punishment. The only objective being conducted within the death penalty is arguing that executing these criminals will provide compensation for the victim’s families, or even that it deters other people from committing similar crimes (10 Reasons). Many philosophers argue that certain crimes should automatically result in the person losing his or her "right to life,” and that couldn’t be further from the truth.

Even the guilty have a simple innate right to life. The suspect, or criminal, will lose rights as a result of committing the crime, however, losing their life is not something for the human race to decide. In regards to the deterrent effect, criminals rarely consider the possibility of being on death row right before committing a crime. Not only is this injustice eliminating the equity this country prospered on when stating that ‘every man was created equally,’ but it provides fellow citizens the opportunity to kill another person for committing a crime – or being that judge of right and wrong. This country’s doctrines provides protocols to equip itself when it comes to crime and criminals, and wiping off other life shouldn’t be apart of privileges (Allison).

The death penalty is an unjust and ineffective punishment for criminals. Research has shown the death penalty is not only racially biased, but it doesn’t deter crime, and it’s expensive. Responding to the racial biases this country obtains, this country fosters racial discrimination in direct correlation to the legal justice system. According to DeathPenalty.org, researchers found that, even after controlling for case differences, blacks in Philadelphia were substantially more likely to get the death penalty than other defendants who committed similar murders in other geographical areas of the United States. The judge and jury in this country are also what people call ‘human,’ so the biases they contain will have a direct effect on the trial and its’ outcome (McGuigan).

Of the 1,058 prisoners on death row by Aug. 20, 1982, 42 percent were black, whereas about 12 percent of the United States population is black. Those who receive the death penalty still tend to be poor, poorly educated and represented by public defenders or court-appointed lawyers. The injustice brought about by the death penalty can be eliminated by providing an alternative punishment for the innocent killing of people. To this day, the death penalty has yet to this day been imposed with no regard to racial discrimination. If this world could look away from race/ethnicity, the death penalty would be something that one could support in practice, it’s just that this world is an unjust one that many opponents of the death penalty rally behind.

Within the United States, the legal justice system is flawed for it is run solely by humans, thus ineffectively ‘rolling the dice’ on executing people for their crimes. As seen in Bryan Stevenson’s novel, Just Mercy, he defends a client that is wrongfully convicted of a crime he didn’t commit. In Monroeville, AL around November of 1986, Walther McMillian was at a church fish fry with a multitude of people that could corroborate his presence (McGuigan). When Rona Morrison was murdered, Walter immediately became a suspect on the basis of ethnicity and was falsely accused. Thus, cordially being imprisoned on death row, even before his swift 1.5-day hearing. Bryan Stevenson takes his appellant case, arguing legal brinkmanship and setting his morals on the death penalty.

This book has done similar justifications on a multitude of personal belief ideologies. In short, this book brought about the redefining of the current legal judicial system in regards to killing humans for the crime. Stevenson applies this knowledge when founding the Equal Justice Initiative, which provides legal aid to those in need of financial assistance and convicted felons on the death penalty. Walther McMillian was wrongfully convicted of a crime that he didn’t commit and was put on the death row for such crime. This was an instance in which the legal system in the United States messed up, and there are similar instances in multiple different states. The hope would be that the increased use of DNA evidence would keep innocent people from being sentenced to death row. However, this cannot be a guarantee and if even one innocent person is wrongfully convicted and then given the death penalty, it should be reason enough to outlaw the death penalty.

The use of the death penalty in America is unfair, unjust, and inhumane. As applied in the United States, it’s dispensed in an unfair manner: based on wealth and race. It’s absurd that one kills people who could possibly be innocent, yet are denied the right to a sufficient trial because of racial bias and lack of the financial means to pay for a strong defense. When putting convicted people on the death penalty, it does, in fact, rid this country of ‘dangerous’ criminals, but it also eliminates the possible factor of redeeming themselves. Some supporters of the death penalty argue that crimes are so horrific, that revenge or retribution is the only viable option. This claim isn’t based on logic, but just simple emotions. Vengeance shouldn’t be deemed a justification for the legislative murder of humans.

Furthermore, the extenuation of people by a governing body is coined by ‘legislative murder.’ Not only is this supported, but it can be seen throughout Just Mercy via multiple injustices. Not only is Walter McMillian wrongfully convicted, but he is sent to death with very little supporting documentation. In fact, it has been proved that prosecutors within his trial suppressed evidence and found informants to testify against him on the stand. Some people execute were proven too late to be wrongfully convicted of a crime they did not commit. In Walter’s case, his council fought the federal justice system to prove his innocence. The justice system is centered around the concept of determent. This being said, the opposing side argues that nations with capital punishment have a lower rate of crime. However, there isn’t any hard, scientific data to prove that claim, at least as of 2017. This not only is horrific as there is concrete evidence of the flawed judicial system within the United States, but claims supporting ‘legislative murder’ can almost all be negated.

Capital punishment is a direct violation of civil and human rights within this country. The ACLU, American Civil Liberties Union, “strive to prevent executions and seek the abolition of capital punishment.” The ACLU goes on to say that capital punishment is unfair and unjust for it has a basis on grounds dependent upon how much money, and how skilled their attorney’s on. The death penalty is too closely related to earlier time periods in which slavery wasn’t looked down upon, yet. It stems from barbaric such rituals, and the death penalty honestly has no role in modern society. Of all of the western civilized nations, the United States is the only one who partakes in such punishments.

Since the eighteenth century, counties have made swift appropriations in an attempt to cease the death penalty. The founding fathers of this nation stemmed from the practice of democracy; where all citizens have the innate right to have a life and the pursuit of happiness. The abolition movement for the death penalty has received more and more momentum these days, but politicians refuse to acknowledge their constituents’ demands because it’s such a sensitive political uproar. Legislative murder will still be occurring here in the United States as long as the legal system here fosters from the trunk of vengeance for crimes. The injustice brought upon by the death penalty will extend as far as targeting individuals that fit the ‘stereotype’ of former executions. Instead of such tactics, this country needs to focus more on providing convicted felons with a chance to reform their ways and improve their quality of life. The death penalty is a crime against humanity in its’ very existence. Not only are there people arguing to kill a human for taking the life another, but we have those some people with the fixed mindset that humans have the right to kill. Or to be more specific, the governing body is fueled behind the notion of playing God – or if one believes otherwise, the philosophy of taking “an eye for an eye.”

Works Cited

McGuigan, Brendan, and Bronwyn Harris. “What Is the Death Penalty?” WiseGEEK, Conjecture Corporation, 14 Oct. 2017, www.wisegeek.org/what-is-the-death-penalty.htm.

allison.witte, Salt Lake City UT. “The Death Penalty: Unjust Justice.” Teen Ink, www.teenink.com/opinion/current_events_politics/article/384557/The-Death-Penalty-Unjust-Justice/.

“10 Reasons to Oppose the Death Penalty.” America Magazine, 22 Jan. 2017, www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/1982/11/20/10-reasons-oppose-death-penalty.

“The Case Against the Death Penalty.” American Civil Liberties Union, www.aclu.org/other/case-against-death-penalty.