Human rights for everyone

In a relatively quiet move last month, Gov. Frank O'Bannon signed legislation restricting the use of the death penalty. This legislation, which among other things restricts the death penalty to those over 18, is a step in the right direction. It's time that Indiana joins the rest of the civilized world in completely abolishing the death penalty. \nCapital punishment, or the death penalty, is an ancient method of punishment that proponents use as a political tool to seem tough on crime. Sadly, this cruel and unusual form of punishment has survived the human rights advances we have made in the United States.\nIt might seem as if I'm wasting my time by writing a column on such a heavily contested issue; after all, you've heard all of the arguments before. But there comes a time when an issue is so fundamental that one does not have the option to keep quiet, regardless of how futile the challenge might seem. Human rights (capital punishment in particular) is such an issue.\nSo, why abolish capital punishment? The reasons range from the practical to the philosophical, but the most obvious is that capital punishment is ineffective. Studies have consistently shown that it has no deterrent effect. Simply stated, by putting convicted murderers to death, we are not preventing others from murdering. What's more, some studies and empirical data show that in some cases increased death penalty rates correlate with increased homicide rates. Isn't it striking that such a harsh punishment (touted by supporters as being "tough on crime") doesn't decrease crime and often serves to increase it?\nBut the ineffectiveness of capital punishment is only the beginning of its fatal flaws. One of the most striking problems in our nation's capital punishment system is the racial inequity it perpetuates. In a 1990 study, the General Accounting Office, Congress's research arm, concluded, "In 82 percent of the studies (we reviewed), race of victim was found to influence the likelihood of being charged with capital murder or receiving the death penalty, i.e., those who murdered whites were found to be more likely to be sentenced to death than those who murdered blacks." I find it disturbing that the criminal justice system in the United States seems to value the life of a white person more highly than that of a black person (even if, as some argue, this inequity is a myth, the mere perception of unfairness is harmful). Compound this with the fact that more than half of death row inmates are black and, in some states, blacks are more likely to receive the death penalty than whites who committed the same crime, and a disturbing trend arises.\nIn combination with these factual reasons, there are ethical reasons for opposing the death penalty as well. Ethical consideration is reflected in the Declaration of Independence's statement that all people have unalienable rights, including "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Capital punishment unequivocally denies people of all of these rights. While the government justifies imprisoning people to protect the rights of others, killing convicts makes the public no safer (in fact, as mentioned above, it might serve to decrease public safety).\nIt is time the United States realizes that capital punishment has no role in today's society. Indiana is moving in the right direction, but it, along with every state, must ban capital punishment for good.