Off With Their Heads?

Guest Opinion

By Greg Holmes | Oct. 25, 2025

I was surprised (actually shocked) to learn recently that there is a movement afoot to bring back the use of the guillotine to execute death row prisoners as a form of capital punishment.

Originally the guillotine was designed as a “more effective and less painful” method of execution. Other methods, such the use of firing squads and decapitation by swords or axes, were less quick and thus seen as more painful.

The guillotine was used to execute thousands of people in France during the period known as the “Reign of Terror”. The use of guillotine dropped off dramatically during the period of the 1960s and ’70s until it was finally banned by France in 1981.

So why the current interest in bringing back such a gruesome method of execution of death row prisoners? Why do we have to sentence anyone to death by any means in the first place? Why isn’t a life sentence in prison without parole punishment enough?

Seventy percent of the countries in the world have fully abolished the death penalty. On the other hand, twenty countries carried out executions in 2022; the top five of which were China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United States.

As I write this column, 35 men have died by court-ordered executions in the United States so far this year, and several more are scheduled this month. This is the highest total since 2012, when 43 inmates were put to death. These executions come at a time when there is increasing pressure to continue if not expand the use of the death penalty.

Donald Trump has argued that by doing so it will “…deter criminals and protect American people,” yet there is no evidence that the death penalty has been a deterrent to others committing a capital offense such as murder. Study after study has failed to demonstrate a correlation between the two.

This hardly comes as a surprise. Violent crimes such as murder are impulsive acts that are typically born out of rage or other mental health issues, not after a careful consideration of the potential punishment for committing such a crime. The fear of getting caught is much greater than whatever form of punishment criminals will receive.

According to data collected by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), states that have the death penalty do not have lower crime or murder rates than states that do not. In fact, the vast majority of mass shootings since 1976 have occurred in states that do have the death penalty.

The failure of the death penalty to deter future violence is hardly the only problem with its continued use. Sentencing criminals for execution and warehousing them on death row is much more expensive than a sentence of life imprisonment. There are several reasons for the higher cost. Very few criminals facing a potential death penalty sentence can afford an attorney, and therefore the state must provide a public attorney for their defense. So the state must pay for both the prosecution and the defense. And just who is “the state”? That would be you, the taxpayer. Other contributing factors in the higher cost of the death penalty than a life sentence include an almost certain likelihood of a series of lengthy appeals.

The most disturbing problem in the continued use of the death penalty is the risk of killing someone who is innocent.

During the past 50 years, over 200 people on death row have been exonerated. Researchers have concluded that for every 10 people who are executed, at least one was innocent. Several factors contribute to erroneous sentencing, including racial bias, inadequate defense of the accused, and the use of informants whose testimony is false or otherwise compromised.

Perhaps one of the most important reasons to end the use of capital punishment has to do with the question about whether it is right to kill those who have killed someone else. Most of the world’s religions, including Catholicism and Judaism, are against the use of the death penalty based on moral and theological grounds. According to these teachings, killing another person is wrong and simply continues to perpetuate an ongoing cycle of violence.

In the words of Martin Luther King, Jr.: “Hate begets hate; violence begets violence. We must meet the forces of hate with the power of love.”

One recent example of the difference between the forces of hate versus the power of love was at the memorial service for Charlie Kirk. Kirk’s wife, Erika, talked about forgiving her husband’s killer, whereas President Trump openly disagreed with her and stated that he “hated” his opponents. (His comments were hardly surprising; his second go round as president has been one of retribution and vengeance against those who he believes are his enemies.)

Continuing to use the death penalty to punish those who commit heinous crimes makes absolutely no sense. The bottom line is that it is a barbaric form of violence. Punishment that is neither cruel nor unusual is what is needed; killing someone is not only ineffective and expensive but immoral.

Greg Holmes lives and writes in Traverse City.