Death Penalty Arguments by Eckhom, Haag, and Nathanson

Death Penalty Arguments by Eckhom, Haag, and Nathanson

        Erik Eckhom, in Studies Find Death Penalty Ted to Race of the Victims, reports factual evidences which reveal that our judicial system “places more value on the lives of whites than of backs” (270).  Eckhom’s studies show that “killers of white people are more likely to receive death sentences than killers of blacks” (270).  He further presents an alarming fact of bias and injustice working from the root of our justice system, for example, the prosecutors.  The prosecutors, who are predominantly white, according to Eckhom, often discriminate black defendants by not allowing them the options to plea bargain.  The bias and discrimination of black defendants in U.S. justice system that are showcased in Erik Eckhom’s study provoke debates regarding whether Death Penalty should be abolished, since it is shown to be racially unjust.

        Irrespective of the racial unjust found in our justice system, Ernest van den Haag, in his essay, The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense, defends our present justice system as useful, expedient, and should not be abolished.  Haag argues that if “execution of those who have committed heinous murders…deter only one murder per year,” (247, emphasis added) then, the death penalty, on the grounds of its “deterrent effect,” should be warranted.  He believes, in other words, that justice is independent of racial discrimination in our justice system, as long as the punishment fits the crime of the perpetrators.  Not only do capital punishments act as “retribution” to the fitting criminals, according to Haag, it even dignifies/humanizes the perpetrators by acting as atonements for their sins.  Haag’s underlying argument is that if our justice system works fairly well most of the time (punishing as many of the guilty as possible, regardless of whether others have avoided punishment), then, the system is satisfactory and just on the grounds that “miscarriages of justice are offset by the moral benefits” (248) reaped by our society.

        Stephen Nathanson, in his essay, Does It Matter If the Death Penalty Is Arbitraily Administered, counter argues Haag’s above-mentioned claims.  He argues that the death penalty ought to be abolished because it is racially discriminatory and arbitrarily applied to the perpetrators.  Although no one admits that race is a factor, statistical reasons abound to predict that it will be a deciding factor in discerning who is guilty, who deserves to die, and what level of punishment is due to those defendants.  Like that of Eckhom’s study, the statistical findings by Bowers and Pierce corroborate the fact that the killers of “whites have the greatest chance of being executed, while whites killing blacks have the least chance of execution” (277).  This racial injustice in our legal infrastructure resonates that a life of a white person is more valued in our society.  Citing these statistical facts, Nathanson argues that the fact, for example, even our prosecutors fall into this practice of racial injustice (deciding who deserves the options to plea bargain), proves that our very foundation of the justice system is corrupt.  This judicial caprice of deciding “who deserves to die” or “what level of punishment” is due based on the color of one’s skin, is all the more appalling when considering the fact that a falsely accused victims who are put to death have no more future rights/legal appeal should new facts be discovered.  Nathanson concludes, therefore, since our justice system has shown that it is racially biased and thus proven to be at least partially wrong, then, the system itself is ineffective and unjust since “unequal justice is not justice” (278).  This problem is further exacerbated by the fact that our present discriminatory trends seem irreversible, due to our society’s deeply ingrained, racial ideologies.  Under our present judicial system, Nathanson says, for a Black perpetrator to receive a non-discriminatory treatment is too rare (if the victim is white).  Therefore, since our justice system is racially arbitrary and cannot be fixed due to deeply ingrained racism, Nathanson believes that the entire application of the death penalty itself must be reevaluated and abolished.

Works Cited

Eckhom, Erick. “Studies Find Death Penalty Ted to Race of the Victims.” Contemporary

Moral Issues in a Diverse Society. McDonald Julie M. Wadsworth:

Belmont, 1998. 270- 273.

Haag, Ernest van den. “The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense.” Contemporary

Moral Issues in a Diverse Society. McDonald Julie M. Wadsworth:

Belmont, 1998. 247- 250.

Nathanson, Stephen. “Does It Matter If the Death Penalty Is Arbitraily Administered?”

Contemporary Moral Issues in a Diverse Society. McDonald Julie M. Wadsworth:

Belmont, 1998. 273- 282.