Death Penalty Debate Essay, Research Paper

Should the death penalty be nationwide?

Thirty-eight states have the death penalty. There are 7-10 types of homicides that are

punishable by death.. No one under 18 can be given the death penalty. Lethal injection is the

most common form of execution. It is used in 32 states. Other forms of execution include

electrocution, firing squad, gas chamber, and hanging. Three-thousand-five-hundred people are

currently on death row awaiting execution.

The death penalty should be eliminated completely. It is not fair to kill potentially

innocent people because they had a poor or inexperienced lawyer. The death penalty is to

expensive and it does not deter crime. It is these three main reasons that I feel the death

penalty should be abolished.

It is unfair to kill those who had a bad lawyer. Many of the people facing the death

sentence cannot afford a good lawyer therefore one is appointed to them. Often times these

lawyers are young and inexperienced. Because of this people are being put to death because of

the mistakes their lawyers made. “Poor people get poor representation. Thy are represented by

overworked public defenders and private lawyers whore aren’t getting paid. That’s not equal

justice.” said a Louisiana lawyer. We cannot sentence people to death because of the mistakes

of others.

The death penalty is way too expensive. The government spends over $2 million dollars

per execution on extra costs that are only there because of the death penalty. This goes beyond

the costs of a typical murder case without the death penalty and costs of incarceration resulting

from a life sentence. The trial alone is 3.5 times more expensive than if the death penalty had

not been sought. And the cost is doubled to execute someone rather than keep him/her in prison

for 40 years. The death penalty is not cost effective.

On top of the cost of the death penalty, research shows that the death penalty does not

deter crime. In two neighboring states one with the death penalty and one with out, the state

without the death penalty had less crime. In a survey of police chiefs across the country,

expanding the death penalty was the least effective way to deter crime. Many of the people on

death row were faced with death every day of their life, therefore the threat of getting the death

penalty has no effect on them. Statistics show that the best way to deter crime is swift and sure

action. The death penalty is anything but swift or sure.

However, there is evidence in the bible that justifies the death penalty. “Whoever shed’s

man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed.” (Genesis 9:6) But who is to judge whether or not

someone should die? “May the lord be our judge.” (1 Samuel 24:15) “May the lord avenge the

wrongs you have done me.”

(1samuel 24:12) The Bible also says “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” But every one

also knows that two wrongs don’t make a right. It is very simple, sentencing someone to the

death penalty is the same as killing them and killing is wrong.

There is no good reason to keep the death penalty because it has no effect on the

deterrence of crime. We need to stop wasting money on the death penalty and invest that

money in crime prevention methods such as reducing drug abuse, bettering the economy and

providing more job opportunities, simplifying court rule and give longer prison sentences, putting

more police officers on the streets, and reducing guns on the streets. Without first taking these

proper advances in crime prevention the death penalty is a waste of time and money

CQ researcher “death penalty debate”

deathpenalty information center