Capital Punishment in Historical Perspective (Not Being yet Another Argument Pro or Con)
LOOKING BEYOND THE USUAL POINTS OF DEBATE
Like an old tennis shoe that’s long been among the family dog’s treasured possessions, the death penalty is one of those issues so chewed over as to be almost beyond recognition. Yet the debate goes on: like other issues overcharged with emotional content, it promises to join death, war, and taxes as a constant of social experience. Elaborate statistical studies purport to show that capital punishment is or is not a more effective deterrent than life imprisonment; that it is or is not more costly than imprisonment; that it does or does not brutalize society and pander to mankind’s basest instincts.
Other statistics demonstrate that capital punishment is or is not simply closet racism or thinly disguised contempt for the poor.
“Scientific,” too, is an argument based on the optimistic theory of rehabilitation, popularized in the 18th century by the Marchese di Beccaria: educational detention would turn the criminal into a productive, peaceful citizen. Proponents of this theory in its contemporary form assure us that with just a bit more understanding of the criminal’s enzymes or childhood trauma, a bit more tinkering with the mechanics of behavior modification, Beccaria’s promise will at last be fulfilled.
Finally, a political instinct, before which at least one Supreme Court justice bows, warns that a failure to recognize and respond to society’s demand for appropriate retribution will diminish respect for law across the board.
You May Also Enjoy
The criminal-justice system awkwardly carried into the 20th century vestiges of the remote, far less complex society in and for which it was conceived.
We do not trust in princes -- even sometimes the princes of the Church -- but in the solemn promises of Jesus Christ.
Clayton requested a "formal tie to the monastery" while in jail. He said he was already leading a monastic life and was eager for it to be embraced by the Church.