Murders Must Pay

Running head: Murders Must Pay

Murders Must Pay

Chase Waterstradt

Introduction to Criminal Justice Section 001

Criminals on death row should be executed, because their constitutional right of no cruel and unusual punishment should be considered invalid. One might ask why, because in committing their crime they violated the constitutional rights of the victim. So why should the criminals' constitutional rights supersede the victims'. Many people in the United States believe it is wrong to execute criminals for several different reasons. Their reasons for not supporting the death penalty include a convicted person may still be innocent, it's racist, and it does not deter people from committing capital offense crimes. In my opinion, there is a small chance of error but if the public really knew how executions were carried out in the chambers of death it would generate fear or at a minimum a thought before committing a capital offense.

The Eight Amendment is crossed with the Fifth Amendment which makes the death penalty legal (Haas and Conrad, 1983). The Fifth Amendment was constructed in 1791 the same year as the Eight Amendment. The Fifth Amendment clearly states "No one shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law" (Haas and Conrad, 1983). Since the criminal is being convicted of depriving a citizen of life and liberty he is allowed to be punished with the ultimate price which is the death penalty or their life. Although opponents argue that the death penalty methods are cruel and unusual punishment. What about the assault, rape, torture, kidnapping, and murder of the victims, is that not cruel and unusual punishment? They did not acknowledge the victim's constitutional rights and they spit at the constitution and the rights of the victim but we as a society allow the convict to hide behind the rights he spit at.

When a felon is convicted he or she will lose their right to vote. Why is one constitutional right revoked after being convicted but society must uphold other constitutional rights. But when a vicious killer commits a crime his rights supersede the victims who have done nothing against the constitution? I don't see advocate groups or felons suing the government to get their constitutional right to vote changed. We can take away their right to vote and freedom, but not their life? If one constitutional right can be revoked then why not revoke the right of cruel and unusual punishment.

To counteract the claim that capital punishment is cruel and unusual. A few states allow the convicted felon to choose his or her method of execution (Jasper, 1998). This choice of punishment is more than the victims of these crimes were allowed. In a majority of capital cases the criminal was allowed to torture the victim for hours on end. If they choose to commit a capital crime then why not execute them? They have basically chosen their fate and the punishment allowed by law. Take the crime sprees of Edmund Kemper and Henry Lee Lucas. Kemper killed his grandparents and hitchhikers and decapitated his own mother, is that not cruel or unusual (Ramsland, 2006). Henry Lee Lucas murdered, raped, robbed and mutilated men, women, and children (Ramsland, 2006). What is cruel about executing a man who mutilated his victims no matter what their sex or age? Lucas showed no mercy, so why do opponents of the death penalty want this man treated better than his victims? Any severe pain afflicted on Lucas is well deserved and probably too little based on his cruelty to his victims and their families.

In some states and special cases the lack of the death penalty can open the door for a capital crime felon to be released back into the public. This type of case is the ultimate slap in the face to the victim and their family, Marc Dutroux is a case that fits this scenario. Dutroux abducted and raped girls and six were starved to death (Dutroux charged over horrific murders, 2004), is that not cruel and unusual. He got a life sentence with a chance of parole (Bell, 2004) is that not horrific or the most cruel and unusual punishment to the family of his victims. No one was suing for their constitutional rights. Dutroux should have been sentenced to death since he even confessed to doing the crime (Bell, 2004). Death penalty opponents protest, march, sue and cry over taking the life of ruthless criminals, but people allow ruthless criminals the opportunity to not pay for their actions or crimes. At least Dutroux cannot vote when he gets out of prison! The lack of voting rights is a small comfort to the victim's family or even his next victim.

Cruel punishments are needed to send messages to criminals and the public that if you deprive a man or woman of his or her rights you will pay the ultimate price. I agree that there is pain involved in most punishments (Jasper, 1998). Though it is no more painful than what the victims and their loved ones have suffered. John Conrad in 1983 said, "Respond to his wrong by doing the same wrong." (Paternoster, 199). How is our nation doing the same wrong? We our obligated to take the life of the man who ignored the system of our country, as soon as man is convicted he is no longer a freeman he lost his rights and he is now property of the state. Punishing a man for a horrific crime is a necessary thing. We must show the public that the punishment will fit the crime because if we don't the family of victims or psychotic vigilantes will choose who lives or dies and the law of "an eye for an eye" will prevail by any means necessary.

Errors in the investigation are possible but no person or system is perfect. We must continue to carry out the sentence until they can prove a convicted felon is innocent. Since 1973 there have been only 122 exonerations, only 120 are still free (death penalty information center, 2006). Sine 1976 there has been 1,009 executions (death penalty information center, 2006). There is another 3,390 people waiting to be executed (death penalty information center, 2006). Which means only 2.7% of people on death row over the last 33 years have been found not guilty and have not been executed. The error rate is not zero but it is a very low percentage. Would the percentage of new victims be greater than 2.7% if these ruthless criminals were put back on the street.

Racism