A Never Ending Argument of Capital Punishment

Capital punishment can be a taboo subject when spoken about. With both sides displaying facts that misrepresent each others case, there is no apparent winner. However in a fact finding argument it can be seen that capital punishment lacks consistency among minorities and creates racial disparities in sentencing. It suggests that race plays a role in the application of the death penalty.

As of March 12, 2009 there are 3309 adults on death row in the United States. Of those inmates 41.7% (1379) are African American, 45% (1489) White, 11% (364) Hispanic and 2.3% (77)other This means minorities represent more than half of the people on death row. This in turn leads to ethnicity of offender verse victim. Of the 41.7% African Americans, 235 have been sentenced to death for killing someone that is White Only 15 White people of the 45% have been sentenced for killing an African American.

With all the facts taken into account and many of the issues at hand the biased corporal punishment of United States towards minorities, specifically African Americans, needs to be reevaluated and modified. The ineffective guidelines and constraints in capital sentencing process are resulting in decisions that are prejudice. It has been proven with many studies and presented with the statistical facts above that racial disparities in sentencing suggest that race plays a role in the relevance of the death penalty. It can be seen that states that do not have the death penalty have a better success rate on crime and have done much better in the past ten years than states who impose the death penalty. The sentencing guidelines that help guide decisions are aware or unaware show prejudice about who the worst kind of criminals is and who the more approving victims are. In no way does the criminal justice process have the right to decide who is worthy of capital punishment by the ethnicity or race of a person. It is our rights as American Citizens to have to equal protection under the 14th amendment. Equality must be presented to all races and ethnicities at all times to have a equal treatment during sentencing deliberation. Possible steps could include the exclusion of defendant and victims race if possible. With the jury, judge and prosecution being excluded from race, there might be a chance for a deliberation that is solely based on the criminal act rather than racial disparities. Exploring better solutions can be a key factor to destroying the ineffective guidelines and constraints in the sentencing process.

However the criminal justice process has taken the proper steps in Juvenile offenders receiving the death penalty. In March of 2005 the U.S. ruled that the death penalty for those who had committed their crimes at under 18 years of age was cruel and unusual punishment and hence barred by the Constitution.There had been 22 Juveniles executed from 1976 to 2005. It seems that sentencing guidelines that fail to adequately guide capital punishment for adults has been dismissed within OJJDP. Racial disparities continue to plague the court system. But with the application of death penalty removed, it seems that the justice process is looking in the best interest for the youth.

Policies and Minority Juveniles

Criminal Justice policies and practices are tightly coupled with political behavior. Politicians contribute to fear of crime and lead the public to believe that crime is a serious social problem that needs government intervention. That is where politicians implement policies that do not rehabilitate and crack down on juvenile delinquent behavior. With these policies in place they are able to demonstrate policy success without fear of losing any kind of support. “Getting tough” doesn’t help our society; it’s just a front that appeals to the mass public.

The federal government has provided millions of dollars to state and local governments to assist the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in their efforts to prevent youth delinquency. Yet the amount spent on prevention programs is sallow in comparison to what is spent on punishment and placement of juveniles in confinement. These so called “get tough” policies do not necessarily work. There is a need to identify what works in areas where these juvenile minorities reside. Programs that encompass effective early intervention with at risk children and families need to be developed. As stated in Bad Kids: Race and the Transformation of the Juvenile Court by Barry Feld, “As minorities became urban Americas and the public attributed increase in crime primarily to minority youth, crime intersected to produce more punitive juvenile justice policies.” These policies have not been targeted at helping disadvantaged minority youth. The development prevention approach that focuses on risk factors in family, school, communities and individuals needs to be implemented. Policies need to be placed more around rehab than punishment.

Juvenile delinquency legislation seems to be more political campaigns rather than dealing with the actual problems. With a cost of 267 million dollars a year towards OJJDP we cannot keep putting away juveniles without trying to rehabilitate them. If the OJJDP can properly introduce effective rehabilitation programs, the amount of juveniles and their cost might significantly drop. In order to accomplish this, the justice system must first attempt to implement more policies for better rehabilitation efforts. Otherwise we will continue to put more money into a system which seems to be growing more every year. Rehabilitation is the answer to stop the growing juvenile delinquency population and helping put money back into America.