I’ve noticed lately that the death penalty has come under a lot of fire around campus. Groups are popping up left and right with an anti-capital punishment agenda.

I strongly support the death penalty and feel that it is about time someone stepped up in the system’s defense.

I could write for pages and pages, but I’ll limit myself to three points.

These are the matters of racial bias, innocence and the justification of the state as executioner.

Death penalty opponents claim that the system unfairly targets minorities.

This is not true.

The United States Bureau of Justice Statistics says, “Since the death penalty was reinstated . . . in 1979, white inmates have made up the majority of those under sentence of death.”

For example, in 2000, there were 1,990 white people under sentence of death and 1,535 black people.

Also in 2000, 49 white convicts and 35 black convicts were executed. So what’s the problem with all of this? Since 1976, white people have committed only 46.5 percent of all homicides, the bureau says.

Can you make an argument for the system being biased? Yes, white people are over-represented.

Death penalty opponents know this, and that’s why you won’t see any of that information.

Instead, they claim that the death penalty is racist, not by looking at the murderer, but by looking at the victim.

The majority of black people on death row are there for killing white people.

The conclusion from this is that the system values white lives more.

My problem with focusing on the victim is that the argument is a contradiction. It says the system values white lives more, yet white people are being executed out of proportion.

Or is it that the system is benevolent toward black murderers and not black victims? It doesn’t work.

Further, it doesn’t matter who the victim is, the fact doesn’t change that they still were murdered, and the person who did it is a murderer.

The question of innocence brings the argument onto very tricky ground.

The justice system goes to great lengths to protect against error through pre-trial, trial, appeal, writ and clemency procedures.

The average time from sentencing to execution is 12 years.

The confusing aspect of this issue is that statistics are misinterpreted and misused to say what death penalty opponents want.

My advice is don’t believe anything without looking into it yourself. And remember, all people in prison say that they’re innocent.

Once the numbers are set aside, the argument boils down to moral grounds.

Almost all of people involved in anti-death penalty campaigns are opposed to the state acting as an executioner.

Critics cry that we share company with Iran, Iraq and China in our use of the death penalty.

There is a big difference between the United States and totalitarian regimes that arbitrarily execute people.

Opponents claim that the state has no right to kill and that it is just as wrong as a murderer.

This is mixing physical parallels with moral parallels. Yes, killing and executing both end in death, but the reasonings are different.

Our most inalienable right is, without question, the right to life.

When an individual takes that away from someone, that person forfeits his own right.

Capital punishment is the state’s way of showing the value of the victim’s life.

Don’t take my word for anything. Draw your own conclusions.

The statistics from the Justice Department can be found at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs.

So before you sign that petition, look at all sides of the matter.