A Constitutional Defense of the Death Penalty

The critical issue about the application of death penalty has been a nationwide discussion in the recent years. People have based their debates on the constitutional and the moral validity of the death penalty. Some people argue that the penalty has imperfections in its application and it is usually applied against the mentally ill people, the poor people and the Americans who possess the African origin. Therefore, they support the abolishment of the act in case it is not applied to all people in a just way. On the other hand, some argues that some crimes committed in the nation are so serious that the only suitable and appropriate punishment is death. They claim that death penalty is more appropriate in the determent of further violent crimes. This essay supports the death penalty putting into consideration different constructional amendments and related court cases.

The constitutional amendments

The 5^th, 8^th and the 14^th amendments in America provides much of constitutional basis of the human rights which many citizens feel that they are deprived off when they are accused of some crimes. The 5^th (1971) amendment in the United States Bill of Rights protects the citizens in that it demands that nobody can be accused of any violent crime without splendid investigation. It states that "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation". According to this amendment, no one shall be held to answer for any principal crime, or otherwise notoriously bad crime unless on a presentment of an accusation of a grand jury. Therefore death penalty is a suitable punishment after proper investigations on crimes have been made.

The 5^th, 8^th and the 14^th amendments in America provides much of constitutional basis of the human rights which many citizens feel that they are deprived off when they are accused of some crimes. The 5^th (1971) amendment in the United States Bill of Rights protects the citizens in that it demands that nobody can be accused of any violent crime without splendid investigation. It states that "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation". According to this amendment, no one shall be held to answer for any principal crime, or otherwise notoriously bad crime unless on a presentment of an accusation of a grand jury. Therefore death penalty is a suitable punishment after proper investigations on crimes have been made.

Various death penalty cases

Furman v. Georgia case which took place in 1972 in the US Supreme Court was the first in the American law because it was based on the controversial query of the capital punishment. Furman 26, who was a black, killed one householder while seeking to enter the home at night by shooting the deceased through the closed door. This case dealt with the constitutionality of the death penalty for murder. During the time of handling the case, the US Supreme Court judges held that the imposition of the death penalty in this case constituted cruel and unusual punishment and violated Constitutional rights. Some supreme justices who supported the death penalty in the Furman v. Georgia in 1972 have since that timer changed their mind on the issue. For example, Justice Harry A. before he retired said that "the death penalty experiment has failed" because "no combination of procedural rules or substantive regulations ever can save the death penalty from its inherent    constitutional deficiencies." On the other hand, other chief Justices such as Warren E. Burger said that the court was deviating into a part which was delegated to the judgment of the state legislatures. They had an opinion that private opinions of justices about morality of death penalty should not be presented as a public policy in court of law. These judges also said that recent polls showed that the death penalty was supported by the public.

In the Gregg v. Georgia case, Gregg was found guilty of the armed robbery and murder and the death sentence was imposed on him by a Georgia grand jury. On an appeal, the Georgia Supreme Court asserted the death sentence. Gregg tried to challenge his remaining death sentence for murder the US Supreme Court where he claimed that the death sentence imposed on him was a 'cruel and unusual' punishment and it violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments because the jury arbitrarily imposed the death sentence. The Court rejected Gregg's claims and asserted the sentence.

In the case of Roper v. Simmons, which was held in 2005, Antonin Scalia, JD, Justice of the US Supreme Court said that: "The Court ignores entirely the threshold inquiry in determining whether a particular punishment complies with the Eighth Amendment: whether it is one of the modes or acts of punishment that had been considered cruel and unusual at the time that the Bill of Rights was adopted. As we have noted in prior cases, the evidence is unusually clear that the Eighth Amendment was not originally understood to prohibit capital punishment for 16- and 17-year-old offenders.

Criminals are becoming part of our daily lives. Due to this, we are supposed to eliminate these criminals from our society. This is achieved by subjecting the correctly accused to a fair punishment. Some criminals such as serial killers, who kill other human beings or for their personal gains, certainly deserve the death penalty. Death penalty should exist in society because of the following reasons. Firstly, I strongly believe that the death penalty serves as an efficient deterrent and this helps in reducing crime. Secondly, it is true that death penalty cannot be reversed, but it is not easy to kill a wrongly convicted person because he/she is given many chances to prove his innocence. Thirdly, through death penalty the society is assured of its safety since the criminals are completely eliminated.

Deterrence is an act of punish a criminal as an example to create fear in other people for the punishment. Death penalty proves to be one of the best punishments that create fear in the mind of any ill-minded person. Everybody on earth even the animals fear death. Therefore most criminals will be forced to rethink especially if the new that their lives were at stake

Some people might be of an opinion that the death penalty is inhuman and primitive, but investigate form people who might have lost their beloved or whose lives have spent in hospitals because of some brutal person. I am sure they would not recommend for the person who ruined their lives to be imprisoned for few years or get rehabilitated. Now, suppose that your wife, sister or daughter. I think that you will not feel good realizing that the offenders are enjoying the benefits of an asylum fully somewhere. Death penalty should not be considered as a kind of revenge. It should be instead be perceived as an ideal method of terminating the lives of the people who do not see any significance in other people's lives. For instance, the sentencing of a murderer to death should be considered as a great favor to any society.

From the Christian point of view, God instituted the death penalty. For instance, verse 17 of Leviticus 24 supports by saying that, "And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death." Finally, death penalty reduces crime and brings justice to criminals and innocent. Therefore, it must be adjusted and made more efficient. The justice system must ensure that an accused person is brought to justice in an accepted way.