Capital Punishment: a Risky and Unnecessary Practice
Capital Punishment: A Risky and Unnecessary Practice
Although the death penalty has been used in American law enforcement since the Constitution was written, it shouldn’t be accepted as a justified punishment. There are more disadvantages than benefits that come from the death penalty so a life sentence should be the alternative punishment for heinous crimes. The death penalty shouldn’t be used because it is economically and socially unhelpful. The current methods of execution are much more costly for prisons and law enforcement; it would be more fiscally responsible to sentence a convict to life. Capital trials are double the cost of life sentence in prison (ACLU), the amount of time and money put towards trials of the death penalty could be more easily resolved by sentencing a convict to life. The money that is being used to pay for capital litigation could be used more effectively, “It is at least possible that devoting that money to crime prevention would prevent more murders than whatever number, if any, an execution would deter” (Liptak, NY Times). Crime prevention funding increase could increase policing which would more effectively prevent crime, rather than skeptical deterrent theories. Money that is put forth towards expensive trials that can cost more than $1million could be put towards other governmental programs (Liptak, NY Times). Current cuts in social services need money to remain effective, appropriating government funds more responsibly could solve a lot of economic struggles regarding budget cuts. Millions of dollars shouldn’t be used each year to kill people, instead it would serve more justice to sentence somebody to life and simultaneously be more economically affordable. Life sentences without release would be more justified because a prisoner would have to dwell with their thoughts for the rest of life instead of dying and having no experience of punishment. The death penalty isn’t responsible for closure; people will move on and
Although the death penalty has been used in American law enforcement since the Constitution was written, it shouldn’t be accepted as a justified punishment. There are more disadvantages than benefits that come from the death penalty so a life sentence should be the alternative punishment for heinous crimes. The death penalty shouldn’t be used because it is economically and socially unhelpful. The current methods of execution are much more costly for prisons and law enforcement; it would be more fiscally responsible to sentence a convict to life. Capital trials are double the cost of life sentence in prison (ACLU), the amount of time and money put towards trials of the death penalty could be more easily resolved by sentencing a convict to life. The money that is being used to pay for capital litigation could be used more effectively, “It is at least possible that devoting that money to crime prevention would prevent more murders than whatever number, if any, an execution would deter” (Liptak, NY Times). Crime prevention funding increase could increase policing which would more effectively prevent crime, rather than skeptical deterrent theories. Money that is put forth towards expensive trials that can cost more than $1million could be put towards other governmental programs (Liptak, NY Times). Current cuts in social services need money to remain effective, appropriating government funds more responsibly could solve a lot of economic struggles regarding budget cuts. Millions of dollars shouldn’t be used each year to kill people, instead it would serve more justice to sentence somebody to life and simultaneously be more economically affordable. Life sentences without release would be more justified because a prisoner would have to dwell with their thoughts for the rest of life instead of dying and having no experience of punishment. The death penalty isn’t responsible for closure; people will move on and