By: Olivia Knafla

The death penalty, otherwise known as capital punishment, has been a very controversial subject for quite some time. There are many arguments both for and against the death penalty, and in this article we will be exploring both sides and their reasonings.

The first argument that we will be looking at revolves around the following idea: many people who would otherwise commit a violent crime are deterred from doing so as they don’t want to risk execution. However, there is no real proof of this situation ever taking place, or at least any that has been recorded to date. I won’t stay on this topic for too long, however, it was worth mentioning as it is commonly brought up in debates between whether the death penalty is right or wrong.

The death penalty also presents a financial issue. According to the Death Penalty Information Center (DIOC), it costs more to execute a prisoner than it does to keep them incarcerated for the rest of their life. It’s not necessarily the execution itself that is so expensive (sometimes reaching the millions), but instead, the extensive trial leading up to it.

Under the Constitution, every U.S. citizen is granted the right to a fair trial, meaning that oftentimes death row inmates require very experienced lawyers. On top of that, DNA testing is a common thing to be used in these trials, and it’s not exactly cheap.

Outside of the trial, death row inmates spend their entire stay on death row apart from general prison populations. They stay in special buildings, which require additional upkeep and guards. From the DIOC again, it is stated that these buildings alone cost states millions more annually than what it would have taken to sentence these inmates to life imprisonment.

All this being said, for those against the death penalty, this presents a solid case for their argument, saving both money and human lives. However, many people who are in favor of the death penalty argue that justice cannot be thought of in financial terms. Some people believe that the money is worth spending to rid the world of criminals who have committed the worst of crimes, and many people have expressed that opinion on online forums such as Reddit and Quora. 

The final issue we will be looking at today is that of false conviction. This is possibly the most spoken about, and it presents a great controversy among people.

It is estimated that 1% of the US prison system, or roughly 20,000 people, have been falsely convicted. However, when we focus solely on death row inmates, that percentage only increases.

A study by The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences concluded that roughly 4% of people on death row were, and are likely, innocent. As of July 2020, states have executed 1,516 people since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. If you calculate 4% of that number, that leaves you with 60 people who were executed after being falsely convicted.

For those against capital punishment, this is enough evidence to get rid of it altogether. And while false execution is a serious risk and is not something to be overlooked, many people in favor of the death penalty believe that this is a risk worth taking.

On top of that, the trial leading up to the execution of an individual is quite thorough, with years or even decades between sentencing and execution. It is estimated that nearly a quarter of death row inmates in the United State die of natural causes while awaiting their execution date.

To conclude, there are many arguments that are both for and against capital punishment, and many people who believe in the statements for both sides. There are plenty of reasons to take one side or the other, but it seems that the controversy of this issue will not be going away anytime soon.

When it comes down to it – is it moral to punish somebody by taking their life? That’s for you to decide.

By: Olivia Knafla

A term that you may have heard, or seen circulating around social media lately, is “ACAB.” In fact, this summer, the term hit a spike of popularity in regards to Google searches about it. But with so many more people interested (and critical), there are bound to be some misconceptions, or even simple questions, about what it means, and hopefully I can help use what I know, and have learned, to help clear those up in this article.

Does ACAB mean all cops are bad?

No. In reality, it means ‘All Cops are Bast***s’, meaning that they are bastardized by the position of power that they are put in, and that the policing system in America is inherently corrupt.

It also means that choosing to become a police officer, and to support the system, makes that person complicit. So, while not meaning that each individual officer is a bad person, it does mean that they are still supporting a system that has historically oppressed people of color.

Why do people say that the police force was built upon racism?

The answer to this question is simple – because it was. According to ‘Mapping Police Violence,’ the beginning of policing in America dates back to times of slavery in the 17th and 18th centuries. Mostly (but not limited to) the South of the United States, created what was dubbed as the “Night Watch,” groups of white people whose job was to track down runaway enslaved individuals and return them to their slave owners. These people would also enforce laws that furthered discrimation against black people. At the time, the job of these Night Watchers was comparable to bounty hunting, and sheriffs would oftentimes go as far as torturing the enslaved people who they captured. 

In the Reconstruction era, the police force helped Southerners in ex-Confederate states to keep the power that they had, as people would use the police force to ensure that white Americans could maintain their rights while at the same time creating what is known as “Black Codes” and vagrancy laws, which would allow police the arrest freed black Americans for small, and even non-existent, crimes. While they were no longer “Night watchers,” they were now slave catchers, who would later reform into the police that we know today. This allowed former slave owners to legally re-enslave any black person by “catching them” for a crime that is either minimal or non existent. 

Even today, ‘Mapping Police Violence’ shows that black people are 3 times more likely to be killed by police than white people are. To be more specific, while the white police homicide rate is 2.5, the PHR for is 3.8 for hispanic people and 6.6 for black people. Even when looking at unarmed killings, black people are still 1.3 times more likely to be killed by police than a white person is. 

What do people mean when they say they want to defund or abolish the police?

Firstly, it should be noted that defunding and abolishing the police are two very different things. According to Brookings.edu, defunding the police means, “reallocating or redirecting funding away from the police department to other government agencies funded by the local municipality.” 

The act of defunding the police has some potential benefits which can reduce both police violence and crime, focusing on de-escalation of what could otherwise turn violent, as well as an entirely new approach for non-violent calls to 911. In short, the act of defunding the police and reallocating some, not all, of their funding to serve the community could result in less violence and killings by police officers.

Abolishing the police is different from defunding the police. A statement from MPD150’s, a group from Minneapolis in favor of police abolition, Arriana Nason said in a statement: “We’re not abolishing help. We’re abolishing police. That’s very different. We have to do the work to imagine something different and to listen to what people in different neighborhoods and communities want.”

The idea behind police abolition is that access to well-paying jobs, affordable housing, healthy food, education, and health care is the way to combat police issues, all while taking steps towards a police free future. As of right now, a police free future is unlikely to be something that happens in the short term, but it is possible that some of these ideas may be tested soon in Minneapolis after a city council vote to dissolve the city’s police department resulted in a veto-proof supermajority.

How can I learn more and educate myself?

Something as simple as a Google search will get you lots of information, just be sure that the information you are reading is unbiased and reliable. There is much more to know about ACAB and the history of policing in America than what is stated in this article, so I would definitely urge you to look into it yourself if you feel so inclined.

For more information, please visit:

• “Anarchy And ‘Acab’: Why The Turn Of Phrase?” www.theransomnote.com/musings/articles/anarchy-and-acab-why-the-turn-of-phrase/ 
• “‘ACAB’ and the History of Policing in America.” registerforum.org/12197/opinion/acab-and-the-history-of-poulicing-in-america/
• Mapping Police Violence, mappingpoliceviolence.org/ (Database)
• “What Does ‘Defund the Police’ Mean and Does It Have Merit?”  www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2020/06/19/what-does-defund-the-police-mean-and-does-it-have-merit/.
• “What Abolishing the Police Could Actually Look like, According to Experts.” http://www.insider.com/police-abolition-what-does-it-mean-how-does-it-work-2020-6.
• What Does ACAB Mean? And Where Does the Phrase Come from?, www.vice.com/en/article/akzv48/acab-all-cops-are-bastards-origin-story-protest.
• “What I Mean When I Say I Want to Abolish the Police.” www.independent.co.uk/voices/acab-abolish-police-george-floyd-protests-cops-a9543386.html.