Argument Against The Death Penalty

The ultimate punishment is death. Capital punishment is administered when an individual is convicted of committing serious crimes where people were killed. The death penalty is a very heated topic. Arguments are made through moral, economic, and practical perspectives. Many points, such as whether the death penalty deters crime, are argued both ways by research, making the death penalty a very complex and difficult topic. The death penalty’s many arguments provide for two clear sides, and while both sides have very valuable data and extensive points, the decision ultimately is that the death penalty should not be abolished.

Some of the arguments made against the death penalty deal with morality of the issue. Some people argue that all human

In Washington, death penalty cases cost over a million dollars more than cases where there is no death penalty (Financial Facts About the Death Penalty). When morality is taken out of the question, the death penalty is not the right choice because it is too expensive. Amnesty International reports that the current system in California costs $137 million per year, but without the death penalty it would only cost about $11.5 million (Death Penalty Cost). All this money saved on not going for the death penalty could be diverted to other programs which may include improving police forces or

Professor Lamperti concluded that the research showed no deterrent effect, while others say it does have an effect (Lamperti). Ernest van den Haag, a Professor of Jurisprudence at Fordham University states that states with high murder rates that have a death penalty, would have an even higher murder rate without death penalty (The Death Penalty Prevents Future Murders). Also, if life in prison was a worse punishment, then why do convicted criminals like Tsnaravez, one of the Boston Marathon bombers, try and get life in jail instead of the death