Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
essay on the costs of the death penalty
pros and cons about death penalty
pros and cons about death penalty
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: essay on the costs of the death penalty
One of the most common arguments made by the anti-death penalty institutions is that the innocent have been executed. There is little proof that people have been executed innocent in the present with our current forensics. Another factor to take into account is that forensic technology will only continue to improve as time goes by. One example is the development of the DNA sample which has been used to prove multiple criminals to be in fact criminals. One of the DNA profiling was used on Richard Buckland who was accused of raping and strangling to death, Dawn Ashworth. He was pressured to admitting the crime through interrogation even though officials were told he had learning difficulties. Utilizing blood samples of Buckland and semen of the …show more content…
The cost of the DP is “10 times more expensive to kill them than to keep them alive” (Robertson, 29). They believe that the felons charged guilty will tend to have more cases in order to appeal their sentence. These appeals will consume more hours on court staff, public defenders, and court-appointed which means more money is being taken away from the taxpayers. Due to more appeals occurring, the death penalty will also require more attorneys that are considered “death penalty certified” (Robertson, 30) which results in highers costs. This number is very exaggerated considering that “the death penalty will have ten times more investigation cost, defense and prosecution cost, including court time, guilt/innocence stage, sentencing stage, and appellate review time and cost than DP equivalent LWOP case” (Robertson, 30). It should not be possible for the gap of the death penalty to be 10 times more expensive because that infers that everything would have to also be 10 times more active. The cost combined would mean the prices would not increase by 10 times, but be over 100 times in cost. This claim made by anti-death penalty groups is ridiculous and impossible. Robertson argues the LWOP can be proven of its high expenses compared to the DP if you considered the death penalty related to murder, the average time for them to be incarcerated before execution is 15 years vs. 50 years of LWOP. Not only that, but …show more content…
The reason that people try to escape the prison is due to poor treatment, horrible facilities, and everyday violence. Prisoners are treated like animals. They are locked in their cells, and can freely wander about during scheduled times. In order to isolate these criminals for a lifetime is more inhumane than to kill them swiftly. The DP is used so that criminals do not have to suffer this humiliation for the rest of their lives. Prisoners live in a constant struggle to survive their suffering of being raped and facing violence in their prison cell. Comparing to a terrorist such as Osama Bin Laden, which choice would he rather pick: to live a life full of humiliation until they die or being “martyred” by the capital punishment? It’s society’s role to punish these convicts, but not to torture them as these actions dehumanizes who they are. The role of the prison is to contain criminals, not to torture or humiliate them. Being sent to prison with LWOP is already a harsh punishment because they will no longer be able to integrate with society ever again. When the court sentences a person to life in prison, what does that mean? Is the court punishing them by sentencing the felon to be humiliated, tortured, and raped? If not, the judge should just say the punishment instead of people assuming that it includes torture and humiliation. The judgement should be taken literally and the criminal is not sentenced to
Unlike popular belief, the cost of sentencing someone to death is actually more expensive than a life sentence in prison. In Washington, since the death penalty was reinstated 5 people have been put to death costing taxpayers roughly $120 million, that's roughly $24 million per case (Seattle University, 2015). A reason that people advocate strongly for the death penalty is because they believe that they should not have to pay for the costs to keep criminals fed, sheltered and imprisoned. In fact, 56% of Canadians surveyed believed that the one time cost of a lethal injection is cheaper and will allow their money to go towards something more advantageous like healthcare or education (Angus Reid). This is actually quite different from the truth, in fact is estimated that it costs $740 000 on average to put someone in prison for life. It is also estimated that it costs roughly $1.26 million to sentence someone to death (Seattle University, 2015). (There seems to be a discrepancy between how much a single case costs and how much Washington spent since the death penalty has been reinstated, but I could not find evidence to why that is). Among the reasons why the death penalty is so expensive is the fact that the time in courts is quite lengthy. Jury trials averaged 40.13 days in cases where the death penalty was being sought, but only 16.79 days
For example, Ted Bundy and terrorists like Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh who have committed serious crimes. Furthermore, during the first decade of the 21st century there were 26 percent more executions in the U.S. than in the 20th century. For instance, during the same time period, the U.S. murder rate decreased by 24 percent (Marquis, 22). However, how would you know if someone was innocent or not? What if they had been framed by the actual killer? That’s why it would take a long and complex process to find out whether that person had not committed such crime. Therefore, innocent people could be put to death for doing no such crimes.
An inmate by the name of Gary Graham drew several protestors to a Huntsville unit in the year 2000; they were there in opposition to Graham’s execution. This day finally came after nineteen years on death row and four appeals. With him being a repeat offender he was not new to this side of the justice system, but after being put in prison he became a political activist who worked to abolish the death penalty. People who stood against his execution argued that his case still had reasonable doubt, he was rehabilitating himself, and his punishment would cause major harm to his family. Aside from that you have the advocates arguing that you have to set example for others, so you must carry out the punishment that was given, and while the execution may harm the offender’s family it will give the victims’ families closure for his crimes.
Introduction: Job David Guerrero lived in downtown San Diego when he was suspected of attacking five homeless men with serious upper-body injuries. Two of which were found dead with their bodies set on fire. Guerrero was linked to the murders form eyewitness testimony and video camera footage. Guerrero should deserve the death penalty under the act of which he commits a murder. This policy of action is morally justified through Lex Talionis, Kantian ethics, Gelernter and the social contract. Although arguments such as Jeffrey Reiman’s might oppose the death penalty and support lesser punishment, my position is a stronger alternative.
In this paper I will ask three people four different questions about their views on the death penalty. The first question I asked was “Why do you feel the death penalty is wrong?” Question number two, “Does the death penalty help protect the public and discourage crime?” Question number three, “Do you consider the death penalty cruel and unusual?” The final question, “Is the death penalty economically justifiable and cost effective?”
This paper will examine the pros and cons of the death penalty. Is it a deterrent or is that a myth. Does it give the family of the victim peace or does it cause them to suffer waiting for appeal after appeal. What are the forms of execution and any evidence of them being cruel and usual punishment. Is the death penalty fair if there are glaring, disparities in sentencing depending on geographic location and the color of the offender and victim’s skin?
Are there really innocent people on death row? At least twenty-three people have been executed who did not commit the crime they were accused of (JAICLC). And that 's only those that we know. And here lies a natural danger of capital punishment...when we execute an innocent person; the real killer is still on the streets, ready to victimize someone else. But when an innocent person is arrested, he is often the motivating reason behind further investigation, and if he is executed, than the case remains closed forever or until someone else gets killed by the real perpetrator. Often the only people who know what really happened are the accused and the dead. It then comes down to the skill of the examination and the defense lawyers as to whether there will be a conviction for accidental murder or for manslaughter. At times, a detective could naturally make an error and possibly lead to the conclusion that the innocent committed the crime. Whether it be multiple years in prison or even capital punishment there is no possible way of revenging or forgiving the judge and jury for this miscarriage of justice. There must always be the concern that the state can order the death penalty justly. In America, a prisoner can be on death row for many years awaiting the outcome of numerous appeals (Short). In simpler terms killing another being with or without evidence is not fair, decent, or ethically
The death penalty was around for many years, though we do not really hear much about it today. The death penalty was used as a way of punishment for committing the most serious crimes. This punishment was executed in various ways, all of them leading to the death of the person being executed. However, there are reasons why this punishment is no longer being used today.
Does the death penalty deter crime? If so, why are crime rates in the United States high compared to those in other nations?
Upon examination, one finds capital punishment to be economically weak and deficient. A common misconception of the death penalty is that the cost to execute a convicted criminal is cheaper than to place a convict in prison for life without parole. Due to the United States judicial system, the process of appeals, which is inevitable with cases involving death as the sentence, incurs an extreme cost and is very time consuming. The cost of a capital trial and execution can be two to six times greater than the amount of money needed to house and feed a prisoner for life. "Studies show incarceration costs roughly $20,000 per inmate per year ($800,000 if a person lives 40 years in prison). Research also shows a death-penalty ease costs roughly $2 million per execution," (Kaplan 2). Capital punishment is extremely expensive and depletes state governments of money that could be used for a wide range of programs that are beneficial. As Belolyn Wiliams-Harold, an author for the journal Black Enterprise, writes that county governments are typically responsible for the costs of prosecution and the costs of the criminal trial, including attorney's fees, and salaries for the members of the courtroom. All this money is spent at the expense of the corrections department and crime prevention programs, which are already is strapped for cash (Williams-Harlod 1). These "financial constraints," such as capital punishment, do not promote a healthy, commercial society, but actually cost and harm the public.
The death penalty is much more expensive than life without parole because the Constitution requires a long and complex judicial process for capital cases. If the death penalty was replaced with a sentence of Life Without the Possibility of Parole, which costs millions less and also ensures that the public is protected while eliminating the risk of an mistake, the money saved could be spent on programs that actually improve the communities in which we live. Scientific studies have consistently failed to demonstrate that executions deter people from committing crime anymore than long prison sentences. Moreover, states without the death penalty have much lower murder rates. The South accounts for 80% of US executions and has the highest regional murder rate (Death Penalty
Many people, including some higher educated people, tend to believe that executing someone is a lot cheaper than the alternative, which is life in prison without the possibility of parole. Indeed, this thought seems like common sense. However, extensive research has been conducted that contradicts that belief. For instance, a study conducted in Maryland, in 2008, found that the state spends roughly 1.9 million dollars more per capital case, compared to non-capital cases (Warden, 2009). But how can this be some may ask. Well, the reason capital punishment costs more than life without the possibility of parole, is because death penalty cases are longer and more expensive. Because the capital punishment is an irreversible sentence, the state, or government, is required to heighten the defendant’s due process in order to decrease the chance of the defendant being innocent (DPIC). Furthermore, not only is it more expensive for the trial phase, it is also a higher price for a state to imprison death row inmates compared to other
Each year there are about 250 people added to death row and 35 executed. From 1976 to 1995 there were a total of 314 people put to death in the US 179 of them were put to death using lethal injection, 123 were put to death using electrocution, 9 were put to death in a gas chamber, 2 were hanged, and 1 was put to death using the firing squad. The death penalty is the harshest form of punishment enforced in the United Sates today. Once a jury has convicted a criminal, they go to the second part of the trial, the punishment phase. If the jury recommends the death penalty and the judge agrees then the criminal will face some form of execution, lethal injection is the most common form used today. There was a period from 1972 to 1976 that capital punishment was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Their reason for this decision was that the death penalty was "cruel and unusual punishment" under the Eighth Amendment. The decision was reversed when new methods of execution were introduced. Capital punishment is a difficult issue and there are as many different opinions as there are people. In our project, both sides have been presented and argued fully.
Every time an innocent person is exonerated based on DNA testing, law enforcement agencies look at what caused the wrongful convictions. There are many issues that contribute to putting guiltless lives behind bars including: eyewitness misidentification, false confessions, imperfect forensic science, and more (Gould and Leo 18). When a witness is taken into a police station to identify a suspect, it is easy for their memories to be blurred and their judgment influenced. This can lead the witness to identify a suspect who is actually innocent. Flawed forensic science practice also contributes to wrongful imprisonments. In the past, analysts have been inaccurate due to carelessness, testified in court presenting evidence that was not based on science, and participated in misconduct. False confessions have also been known to cause unlawful convictions. In some instances, police departments took part in transgression and interviewed their suspects in such an intense manner that a false confession was used cease the interrogation. To imagine that there are innocent people rotting in prison is appalling and something must be done. To prevent wrongful convictions, legislatures should form commissions and policies to reform flawed procedures.
The death penalty has been an issue of debate for several years. Whether or not we should murder murderer’s and basically commit the same crime that they are being killed for committing. People against the death penalty say that we should not use it because of that very reason. They also make claims that innocent people who were wrongly convicted could be killed. Other claims include it not working as a deterrent, it being morally wrong, and that it discriminates. Some even claim that it is cruel and unusual punishment. I would like to shed light on the issue and inform everyone as to why we should keep the death penalty and possibly even use it more than we do now.