In reading Ross Schneiderman’s article on the death penalty (April 5), I observed several arguments that, while constantly used as arguments against the death penalty, do not reflect the reality of the institution. These four basic arguments are: the death penalty is more expensive than life in prison, innocent people are executed, it is prescribed in a racist fashion, and the death penalty has no deterrent effect.
To start, the economic arguments against the death penalty are based on studies that simply do not look at the entire picture. These studies are based on a period of time, from conviction to execution (and the comparable time in prison for a non-death row inmate), and ignore the cost for the latter incarceration of criminals sentenced to life in prison. While the actual trial costs are more for death penalty cases, sentencing someone to life in prison can cost more than twice as much as executing them when all costs are factored in.
The second argument against the death penalty, which states that there is no way to prevent innocent people from being executed, is simply wrong. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, there is no evidence that any innocent person has been executed. None. This is because there are a huge amount of appeals and safeguards built into the death penalty process to prevent this. The release of innocent people from death row does not show that innocents are being executed, instead it shows that the system is doing what it is supposed to do: identifying people who were wrongly convicted and releasing them. Many of these people would still be in jail if not for the added appeals and scrutiny placed on death penalty cases.
The third fallacious argument is that the death penalty is prescribed in a racist fashion. This could not be further from the truth. The numbers that Mr. Schneiderman uses coincidentally stop in 1976, the year that the modern system of the death penalty began (removing arbitrary and race-based problems in the old system). Looking at more applicable studies (such as the Rand study), it is shown that when controlling for the severity and number of murders (important factors to consider), there is no racial disparity in the application of the death penalty.
The last argument that needs to be clarified is that there is no deterrent effect to the death penalty. Actually, numerous studies have shown this to be false (including studies whose findings were endorsed by the US Department of Justice). The 2001 Dezhbakhsh/Rubin study, the most comprehensive study ever of the death penalty, shows that each execution deters, on average, 18 additional murders. In the face of this information, I hope that more people will examine the death penalty and see that it is an effective way to protect the public. When you weigh the facts and the statistical data available, it is clear that the death penalty is a way to deter murder.
Nick Kassotis CAS 2004 617-320-3599 kassotis@bu.edu
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
