Ethical Justification for Capital Punishment

Capital punishment is defined as the judicially ordered execution of a prisoner as punishment for a serious crime. The ethical question regarding capital punishment is a longstanding one to say the least; nonetheless, it has a relatively simple answer, and is perhaps best answered through the rule utilitarianism model. Rule utilitarianism offers the best choice in the long run, by setting a precedent to be followed, in this case relating to punishment and penology.

From the utilitarian stance, punishment exists solely to ensure the continuity of society and the deterrence of future crimes. Statistical evidence proves that when punishment is severe, prompt, and certain that it will in fact act as a successful deterrent to future criminals. Some evidence to support this thesis includes:
âÂ?¢ From 1995 to 2000,” “executions averaged 71 per year, a 21,000 percent increase over the 1966-1980 periods. The murder rate dropped from a high of 10.2 (per 100,000) in 1980 to 5.7 in 1999 – a 44 percent reduction. The murder rate is now at its lowest level since 1966. *
âÂ?¢ Life without parole cases cost $1.2 million – $3.6 million more than equivalent death penalty*
� Roughly around 71% of the American population supports the death penalty*
� A prisoner is incapacitated via execution, from committing another crime.*
� In China, whom has had continuous progression of executions, crime rates have dropped significantly.*

What these points dictate, is that capital punishment can and ought to be used to serve and uphold the best interests of society. For instance, the greatest amount of utility would obviously maintain the importance of keeping killers, rapists, and other heinous criminals off the street. The evidence shows that when executions are used more frequently, they have a direct effect on the murder (and other violent crimes) rate. Subsequently, statistics show that in cases where the death penalty is not an alternative, criminals see no incentive not to kill again, particularly when facing life without parole.

The rule utilitarian model also must seek a cost-effective answer to dealing with harsh criminals. Utility is most widespread when an answer to social problems is addressed in a fiscally responsible, yet efficient manner. The overall cost of death penalty cases average around $2 million in tax dollars (including the series of appeals); this cost is considerably less than what it costs to house and care for a prisoner sentenced to life without parole. Many forget that a prisoner serving such a sentence will (on average) spend about 30-40 years, depending on age, in prison. When this prisoner gets older, he/she requires more care which again because less cost effective.

In countries where it is still legal, the death penalty maintains unwavering support. In fact, studies from a recent Gallup poll, indicate that around 71% of the American people support the death penalty. This also indicates that such a policy wielding such popular support offers the greatest amount of comfort to the public when dealing with harsh criminals. Also, the public takes comfort in knowing that the prisoner will never commit another crime again, unlike instances where prisoners on life without parole have escaped and killed, or stirred violence within a prison and killed a guard or corrections staff member.
Internationally, in nations such as the People’s Republic of China and the Islamic Republic of Iran, the death penalty has utilized in increasingly amounts which have had a direct result in the lowering of crime rates. China executes more prisoners than any other country, and has witnessed an ever-decreasing crime rate. Iran and Vietnam (as well as America) have seen similar results that have solidified support for capital punishment.

Ultimately, the ethical question of capital punishment (to the rule utilitarian) has to be answered in such a way that the greatest amount of utility be spread throughout for the greatest amount of people, as an established precedent. In order for capital punishment to offer such utility, it must always be used in a manner which upholds society and its laws. Prisoners must be treated as a means to an end, and justice employees must be fanatic in their crime detection. Also, the public must be informed at all times of the penal sanctions taken against criminals, and perhaps most importantly, the threat of punishment must yield the same results of deterrence as the actual punishment itself.

The consequence of the successful utilization of capital punishment is highly dependent on the nature of the policy in which it is initiated. For instance, in accordance to rule utilitarian principles, the death penalty will only be efficient and successful when it is assured that the consequences of heinous acts are dealt with severely, promptly, and most importantly, with utmost certainty. Utility is a fragile entity that requires the use of such methods (as capital punishment) in a manner in which utility is openly seen as to not solicit opposition in the form of criticisms over the humanity and usefulness of such tactics. The overall goal of the utilitarian use of capital punishment is in fact to execute as few people as possible, and have the threat of punishment deter more crimes than the actual punishment itself. This guarantees the universal spread of utility amongst the greatest amount of people, by providing a safe and secure state of being.