Con
In the dispensation of capital punishment there are
disparities
along several lines. In U.S.A.
death penalty
states
there are 1794 white DAs, 22 African Americans,
and 22
Latinos. In Philadelphia during 1983 to 1993,
blacks
were 3.9 times more likely to receive a capital
sentence.
On a scale of 1-2, being black increased the
likeliness
of the death penalty of 1.4. On a severity
scale
of the crime of 1-8, murders of 3-7, especially a
scale
of 5 yielded a 25% more likelihood of capital
punishment
for blacks. A culpability index of .6 for black
defendants
with non-black victims was in relation to
a .4
sentencing for non-black defendants with non-black
victims
(Dieter, 1998).
In the U.S.A. murder is a local crime with some
states retaining
the right to capital punishment, the
federal
government has the right to use the death
penalty
also. The domestic law seems to apply
differential
treatment. How does this effect capital
punishment?
Pro
The jurisdiction of capital punishment was returned
to the
states under the tenth amendment. A law that
changes
from time to time, place to place, and from
person
to person does not seem to be a law at all. It
has the
appearance of being judged by the
capriciousness
of human nature. In the U.S.A. this is a
problem
of democracy. The use of polling of public
support
is a key to the legal disposition of capital
punishment
and is used by both sides of the argument.
As a
result problems with the quality of process have
occurred.
The federal government has not been effected
to the
degree of the states.
Con
There are 38 states with the death penalty. Over 820
persons
have been executed since 1973. There are over
3,700
prisoners on death row in the U.S.A. In contrast
to the
two-tier system of state and the federal levels of
government,
international law argues universal
jurisdiction
with absolute rights of citizenship. This
would
guarantee only one standard everywhere. That is
the abolition
of capital punishment and the
commutation
of all capital sentences to life in prison.
In light of the prevailing arguments, should there
be
a moratorium on the death penalty at the state or
federal
level in the U.S.A.?
Pro
In principal there should be no moratorium as capital
punishment
is a weighted argument of applied legal
justice.
There have been defects with procedural law in
various
states. Illinois is one such case. This does not
mean
that all states are defective. The federal system
seems
to be functioning with less controversy. A
moratorium
would only deprive justice to the injured
victimizing
such twice. As stated death sentences should
be reviewed
on a case-by-case basis retaining the
statute.
Con
International law no longer accepts the argument that
the state
is the legal actor in providing self-defense to
citizens
through the use of capital punishment. There
are times
when the state must use deadly force to
insure
the public safety. Capital punishment is legally
cruel
and unusual treatment. A moratorium is supported
by the
use of differential treatment to equal persons
under
the law. It also puts the party state in ascension
or conformity
to international standards of law. This is
inclusive
of the U.S.A. The International Movement is
pro-abolitionist
in all cases.
