Debate centers on the ethics and efficiency of the death penalty. There are many opposing viewpoints on the abolition of the death penalty, each with strong supports and evidence. Many Americans argue against the death penalty, stating that it should be out of the government’s power to kill a person. Racial bias is also present when sentencing criminals to death. Many studies have proven that the death penalty was much more highly recommended for when the victim was white. Out of the persons executed in white-black murders, 20 times there was a white defendant and black victim, and 283 times there was a black defendant and a white victim. People also argue that since the whole process is so lengthy, that it is a waste of time. So far this year, …show more content…
However, John Donohue III, a professor of law Stanford University argues that there is simply no evidence supporting reduced rates of homicide when the death penalty is present. He supports his point by showing that Canada, who does not use the death penalty, does not have increased homicide rates as so many death penalty supporters like to assume. However, in support of the death penalty, former associate Justice of the Supreme Court, Antonin Scalia makes a compelling point about the constitutionality of the death penalty. Scalia states that the laws are very clear, and the 8th Amendment cannot be applied, as well as the fact that some crimes are deserving of death. This is in reference to a case where an 11-month old child was raped and murdered. His thoughts on the matter are as follows: “I would not presume to tell parents whose life has been altered by the brutal murder of a child that life imprisonment is enough.” Author and law professor, Robert Blecker agrees with Scalia, although taking a more conservative approach, stating, “Whereas revenge knows no bounds, retribution must be limited, proportional, and appropriately