Pro-Death Arguers

General Information

Another prevalent opinion in the whole Death Penalty argument comes from Pro death arguers such as lawyer David Muhlhausen and NY times writer/Dutch Sociologist Ernest Van Den Haag.

Mulhausen, working for a well-known American institution The Heritage Foundation, presented a testimony before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Property Rights of the Committee on the Judiciary of the United States Senate, in which his reasoning for the Death Penalty mainly spurred off of studies both proving the true effectivity of the penalty, as well as it’s non-racial bias. Referencing tons of quotes and statistics, he used those to prove the point that the death penalty actually does a job in benefitting American society when it comes to useful crime deterrence.

Van Den Haag bases his argument off of the similar notion that the death penalty is effective in it’s deterrent capability, but also goes on to briefly explain his own moral, logical stance in relation to the ordeal-and how he believes that death, in response to the right crimes, is justified. Using this notion to connect his ideas he also disproves that of what he believes is a weak abolitionist opinion-built off of little to no backing structure, in order to further develop his pro-death sidings.

Alignment With My Claim/Stance

The fact that these opinions have faith that the death penalty can work and be changed aligns them with my ideology. However, their values/beliefs not being based on actual experience of the penalty, going too broad in their reference to change, and even re-sparking pro/anti conflict that’s useless in actually aiding those who feel the brunt of the blow on death row, makes me raise the point again that: the powers of voice being used here are raising the wrong points-leaving true voices powerless. Their arguments make no reference to the flaws within the death penalty system and how that system hurts those who experience it, making what they're arguing for completely unfocused on anything that I believe requires urgent attention. In fact, they almost disregard the whole idea of system flaws altogether for the fact that all they see/are arguing for is the good within the logistical practice of the penalty.

Key Quotes/Standpoints

Muhlhausen:

“The fact that African-Americans are a majority of federal prisoners on death row and a minority in the overall United States population may lead some to conclude that the federal system discriminates against African-Americans. However, there is little rigorous evidence that such disparities exist in the federal system.”

“Using a panel data set of over 3,000 counties from 1977 to 1996, Professors Hashem Dezhbakhsh, Paul R. Rubin, and Joanna M. Shepherd of Emory University found that each execution, on average, results in 18 fewer murders.”

Van Den Haag:

“...anyone who takes another's life should not be encouraged to expect that he will outlive his victim at public expense.”

“Death is final. But where there is life there is hope. Wherefore, life in prison is less feared. Murderers clearly prefer it to execution - otherwise, they would not try to be sentenced to life in prison instead of death (only an infinitesimal percentage of murderers are suicidal).”