The Pros And Cons Of Death Of The Death Penalty

The death penalty wastes the money of the tax payers and is ineffective in stopping crime (Delcour). The cost that it takes to maintain the death penalty could be used for much more important statewide matters. Many law enforcement officials in states with the death penalty claim the money used toward the death penalty is a complete waste of tax dollars (Delcour). An example being, the opinion of law enforcement in states with the death penalty, “The cost of one execution is significantly higher than life imprisonment without parole. At a time when state budgets are slim and cutbacks are the norm, Delcour maintains that the high cost of the death penalty system makes little sense—especially when so many law enforcement officials consider it an ineffective deterrent against homicides and the least efficient use of taxpayer dollars” (Delcour). There are much less expensive ways to punish an inmate that will have a better effect on crime in those states, and cost less. There are greater causes that the money used on the death penalty can be used for. Education is one of the main things that the millions spent on capital punishment could be used for productively. The needs of millions of people in a state are far more important than the execution of a extremely small amount of people. A life-without-parole system would be much better than the current execution system (Delcour). The small amount of

In capital punishment, vast amounts of money are wasted before the prisoner is assigned the death punishment. This is a result from the legal case that has to be processed prior to any decision made, which involves confirming if the suspect is indeed guilty. Without a doubt, this would require several months, documents, and lawyers, all requiring tedious effort and time. Due to this, millions of dollars are used in matters that aren’t necessary, whereas the costs of life imprisonment are significantly lower. As well, life imprisonment will positively benefit the social aspect of the community. Since this form of punishment uses less money, millions of dollars would be saved and chosen to go towards new schools, hospitals, technology, and other services in low-income communities. As a result, more opportunities will open to the less fortunate people, lowering the overall poverty and crime rate, as well as improving the education levels of the area. By choosing life imprisonment as the main form of ultimate punishment, the state of the nation will continue to steadily increase as money is saved, and investments are fulfilling its duty of steering the country towards

In Kellow Chesney's book The Victorian Underworld illustrates that the Victorians tried to use the death penalty as a means of controlling criminal elements in forms of hangings, lethal injection,Electrocution, and firing squads in order to prevent crime( the victorian underworld). in Victorian times, the death penalty was used as a means of controlling. There should be abolishment of this because of the countless innocent men and women being put to death for the stated purpose of preventing crime out of fear. So There should not be a death penalty because it violates human rights, it does not deter crime, and is a cruel and unusual punishment.

Many people have questioned whether or not the death penalty should be allowed in the criminal justice system in the United States. Many states have already abolished the death penalty because of the problems it is causing. The first problem is that innocent lives are being put at risk. Another problem is the amount of money that is being wasted on housing a criminal on death row and later executing them. Lastly, capital punishment does not help with deterring crime. In fact, there have been numerous cases where victims were held on death row for countless years waiting for their execution, but due to technological advancements like DNA evidence, they were later proven innocent. It is important to realize that pursuing, obtaining, and carrying out a capitol conviction is more expensive than housing and feeding a criminal with a life sentence. Again, the death penalty doesn't deter crime any more than a life sentence because putting a criminal in jail for life removes them from society just the same as a death sentence. As a result, the death penalty needs to be outlawed and more life without parole sentences need to be instated.

Funding a system that is so timely and costly is not helping the general population instead draining it. More money is spent on the people who are imprisoned especially those serving a death sentence than the American tax payers who pay for it. This public policy not only allow for the states’ to save money but if the money spent on this process was spent on systems that actually benefit the people such as education it can develop honorable citizens’ instead of expensive inmates. However, many in support of the death penalty may not see a problem with paying for the cost if it means keeping those of the convicted from committing any more crimes that can harm society. This policy proposes to get rid of the death penalty in place of having the prisoner serve life without parole, this in which could perhaps save millions. The policy still will keep the prisoner out of any ones harm and allowed them to still serve time for the law they have broken. Nevertheless, it would not have cost millions of dollars from tax payers in order to do

The death penalty isn’t anywhere on my list” ("New Voices” par. 5). Abbott, who oversees an entire police department says that with $250 million, he can reduce crime without the use of the death penalty. Not even the people arresting and charging criminals, support using millions of dollars to have them executed. This money is coming from their family’s income and could be used to benefit their loved ones directly. Essentially, life without parole costs way less than execution and, a person will eventually die for free in prison. Next, capital cases cause taxpayers to pay approximately $90,000 more per death row prisoner as opposed to prisoners in regular confinement. By putting people on life without parole, taxpayers save millions in taxes and eliminate the possibility of an irreversible mistake.

An argument in opposition of the death penalty is the cost. The word “cost” is affiliated with more than one meaning. There is the numerical value or the estimate the price of a specific piece, this piece being the death penalty. The other is the moral value which pertains to the victims and criminals emotional thought process. Dealing with the cost aspect first, many states confirm that the cost to put a criminal to death via the death penalty, is substantially more than if the criminal were to have life in prison without parole. Anti-death penalty advocates brought economic arguments to the public’s attention which influenced lawmakers in many states to create legislative bills that eliminate capital punishment. By focusing on the costs and inefficiencies of capital punishment, the anti-death penalty movement has given state policymakers a self-interested reason to abolish capital punishment and save their constituents millions of dollars. (Mclaughlin) As early as the 1980s, people on both sides of the death penalty debate started to become aware of the costs involved in capital punishment compared to life imprisonment. (Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review) Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) show 11 states are now considering abolishing executions, with many legislators citing high costs associated with incarcerating and handling often decades-long appeals by death row inmates. (State Crime)

States like New York and New Jersey repealed capital punishment after their citizens spent over $170 million on cases where no executions were made, according to a study done by Richard Dieter. The money could have been spent elsewhere, like making public education environments more comfortable or buying more supplies for public service jobs, like the police force and the firefighters.

The reality in the 21st century is startlingly different the past few decades have seen the importance’s of public defender systems that in many cases rival some of the best lawyers retained on the low many giant law firms in large cities across America not only provide pro-bono counsel in capital cases, but also offer friendship to lawyers whose sole job is to promote in indigent capital defense. Next who pays the ultimate penalty for crimes? The poor. Who gets the death penalty? The poor. After all the talk that goes on in courtroom getting the gathers in the end when the net is cast out it is the poor people who get the death penalty? It has everything to do with the kind of defense. That’s why you’ll never see a Jerremy Webster on death row. As the saying goes capital punishment means those without the capital get the punishment, And let’s start on doctors at executions and the pros and cons accepting capital punish in the worst way principle means accepting it in practice, whether by the hand of a doctor or

The death penalty produces a great drain on the monetary reserves of this country. "A 1982 New York study estimated the death penalty cost conservatively three times that of life imprisonment." (Freedman 2) Often there are calls to reduce the number of appeals and thus cut the costs incurred after the trial. Yet, death penalty trials cost far more than normal trials and this is where much of the extra cost is incurred. Death penalty trials have two phases, and there are special motions and more questions asked of prospective jurors. There is more prosecution investigation into a death penalty case. Yet, the outcome of most of these trials is a sentence other than death. In addition, 50 percent of the trials that do result in death verdicts have the conviction turned into a lesser sentence on appeal. (Ibid. 2) "In short, even if all post-conviction proceedings following the first appeal were abolished, the death penalty system still would be more expensive than the alternative." (Ibid. 3)

The death penalty is both a relevant and interesting topic of discussion as it serves as both a moral and ethical question, yielding many different and opposing opinions. The topic of the death penalty is one that will produce a multitude of differing opinions, resulting in a lot of interesting debate and conversation at the discussion sections. The death penalty, specifically the use of the electric chair, has brought up a lot of debate in the US, as certain states have gone as far as to ban it altogether, whilst others practice it regularly. The death penalty can be beneficial by helping to handle the overcrowding at prison facilities, as well as providing justice to families of victims. With the continuous advancements in technology, DNA testing has become increasingly more accurate and can effectively decipher whether one is guilty or innocent to avoid executing the wrong person. However, there are many negative associations with the death penalty, many being on the issue of moral standards. Many argue that the use of the death penalty goes against the Bill of Rights violation of “Cruel and unusual punishments”, as the death penalty could be seen as both. Despite the strong moral standings against the death penalty, many are also against it because of its extremely expensive cost. Taxpayers are forced to pay several times more money to place an inmate on death row and execute them, than it would cost to keep the inmate in prison for life. Because of this, many are

Have you ever thought of someone murdering a family member? If so would you want them to be on death row? Putting someone on death row creates another murderer which is why the death penalty should NOT be allowed.

One of the controversy's that have been around is about Death Penalty, what people ask is that if it keeps going people will think it is fair to fix every criminal case by death. they believe that they are giving what the people want but they are causing more deaths, and causing for people to believe that death is better than punishment of life in prison. what has been happening with the death penalty is that the government is wasting a lot of money in just one death penalty, lawyers are being called killers and the judges need to know that sentence to life in prison is far more better than death. America wants to save money for other real things, death penalty should stay out of that money in order for them to pay off many debts.

Criminals are sadly apart of our society and have been since the beginning of time, and it

One of the biggest problems as a result of the death penalty is that millions are being spent. The current system in California’s expense on the procedure is $137 million annually, opposing to the cost of an alternative punishment which would be $11.5 million. Taxpayers contribute a great amount of money, “Taxpayers in the state of Colorado have spent nearly $33 million defending suspects in death penalty