Why The Death Penalty Should Be Banned

The death penalty is a process by the law where an individual is killed for an offence punishable by the state through such means. The judicial order that an individual be given a death penalty leads to an execution in the actual enforcement. Many crime offenders are being executed all over the world by their own states for various offenses. Majority of people believe the saying, 'an eye for an eye', but what they don’t realize is that just because someone kills another, it doesn’t give anyone else the justice to take away someone’s life. People don't realize that they are putting the blood of another person on their hands and that their conscience will forever be stained with the life of the one they wanted to die. This, in the end, makes them just as guilty as the person who committed the crime. The only difference is that they didn't pull the trigger, instead they ordered someone else to do it. Because of this reason the death penalty should be abolished because it’s irreversible, there's no humane way to kill, and it violates the eighth amendment.

The death penalty should be abolished because it is is irreversible. Absolute judgments can lead to people paying for crimes they did not commit. Those who are for the death penalty believe that there need to be stringent laws on violent crimes, which in the end it can lead to the minimization of murders.Geo Llyin, an official handling carrying out death penalties states that preventing crime takes long-term research into the causes of the crime, effective police work, and rehabilitation, which includes the death penalty. Joseph M. Bessette, a Tuohy Professor of Government and Ethics, states that if this punishment is not placed, one could escape from jail, and once again, cause even more deaths. On the contrary, a pro of abolishing the death penalty is that it is actually more expensive to kill, making even the dept irreversible for prisons which lack money. Geo Llyin also agrees with this argument, stating that it is cheaper and more humane to avoid and fully stop the execution of prisoners. Peter A. Collins, chairman of the math department at Huron High School, agrees as well, stating that the average cost per death penalty in Oregon and Washington has been steadily increasing over the past decade.

Many people agree that the death penalty is more expensive than a life sentence. Today, 106 countries out of 195 have decided to turn their backs on the death penalty for good because of it’s rising price. 63% of people on http://www.nbcnews.com agree with this statement, with some saying “While punishing the most serious crimes in society may be appealing, the death penalty costs very much, more than it’s worth.”James Abbott, head of the Construction Disputes practice in the Middle East also agrees, stating that "It is a simple fact that seeking the death penalty is more expensive.” Although one pro of having the death penalty is that it can be necessary in life and death situations. https://religionnews.com had a debate over whether Ted Bundy, a mastermind serial killer, truly did deserve the death penalty, arguing that he never would have stopped, and one lost life is much less than what he could have done in the future. Meghan Reinhardt, a contributor writer for the INSIDER webpage also said that if Ted Bundy along with other serial killers are sentenced to the death penalty, there is a chance that they could escape and kill even more people. Though many people would argue that they deserve it, because it’s irreversible and innocent people could be killed, the death penalty, therefore should abolished.

The death penalty should be abolished because not only is it irreversible, but there's no humane way to kill.The nature of these deaths only continues to perpetuate the cycle of violence. Those who are for the death penalty argue that the death penalty is better than confinement because instead of being locked up in a jail cell for the rest of their lives, they are given peace early. "He does not see the death sentence as punishment. He sees it as an escape from punishment," Savitz said before the serial killer, Passaro's lethal injection. Gary Gilmore even "volunteered" for his execution in 1977 because he did not want to live the rest of his life on death row, says ABC News. However, one pro is that the absence of death penalty is linked to crime rate increase, meaning that crime rate is somewhat lowered. As reported by Time magazine, an estimated 2 million people in the United States have been victims of crimes, ranging anywhere from assault to murder. ”With insufficient laws to address this problem or the lack of teeth in these laws, criminals become careless and bolder to commit heinous crimes because of the leniency in punishments and loopholes in the justice system.” claimed the website livingston.org.

There has been much debate over whether there is a completely humane way to kill someone with most people stating that there is. Those who disagree with this statement, however, believe that killing one another is a form of violating one another’s unalienable rights. Ingrid Newkirk, a British animal and people rights activist states “Let’s face it: There is no such thing as a humane slaughter.” Jessica Scott-Reid, a freelance writer and animal advocate also agrees, stating “How can you humanely kill someone who doesn’t want to die? It’s just not possible. You can’t.”On the contrary, opposers believe that even if the condemned person experiences a few minutes of excruciating pain, it is still humane enough for a convicted murderer. Stephanie Pappas also states that there are multiple ways for one to experience a humane killing such as hanging, electrocution, the gas chamber, the firing squad, and the lethal injection. The RSPCA, the largest animal welfare charity in the UK agrees that there is a way for one to experience a humane killing, at least by their definition which states that it must require a person or animal to die without pain, suffering or distress. However, there is no completely humane way to kill, thus the death penalty should be abolished all together.

The death penalty should also be abolished because not only is there no humane way to kill, but it also violates the eighth amendment. While the Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty does not violate the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment, it is still cruel and many believe it violates the amendment. Mandatory death sentences are found to be unconstitutional and violate the Eighth Amendment because they do not take into consideration circumstances mitigating a death sentence. On https://www.law.cornell.edu most people say it does violate the 8th amendment, claiming “It is cruel to kill someone no matter how horrible the crime. It is showing people that if you do something the same will be done to you, it is an eye for an eye. I disagree with that type of justice completely”, one of the commenters states. William J. Brennan, an American judge agrees, stating "Death is not only an unusually severe punishment, unusual in its pain, in its finality, and in its enormity, but it serves no penal purpose more effectively than a less severe punishment.” A pro is that because it violates the eighth amendment, now many states are now beginning to give it up. According to https://osudgen.ga/business/states-where-death-penalty-is-illegal.php, “The death penalty is legal in 30 states and illegal in 20 states.” Raymond Bonner, an American author and investigative reporter even said that “States with no death penalty share lower homicide rates.”

While most people believe death sentences are unconstitutional, about 40% have different thoughts.Those who agree with the death penalty believe that it is, in fact, entirely constitutional. Cornell Law School states that “Eighth Amendment analysis requires that courts consider the evolving standards of decency to determine if a particular punishment constitutes a cruel or unusual punishment.” On Debate.org 44% people say “Capital punishment does not violate the 8th amendment” A pro of the death penalty not breaking the eighth amendment is that if it is highly needed, it is okay to use it. In Debate.org, 45% people claimed that “If needed, death penalty shall be allowed.” “They did the crime, they should do the time.” Geo Llyn stated. Though the death penalty may be reasonable in some circumstances, many people still believe that the death penalty should still be abolished because it violates the eighth amendment.

The death penalty is not a good form of deterrence and cannot deter people from committing crimes. Many types of research have shown that it can even cause more crime to occur. Just because one has killed another doesn’t make killing them right. There is no humane way to kill anyone, for it is only stooping down to their level, making anyone who is involved with the persecution, just as guilty as the criminal had been. In some cases, the so-called “criminal” had nothing to do with the crime at all. Their life is being taken away, which violates the Eighth Amendment because it is a cruel and unusual punishment. Thus, since it’s irreversible, there's no humane way to kill, and it violates the eighth amendment, the death penalty should be abolished.