We need to stop asking ourselves whether or not the murderer on trial deserves to die and start asking ourselves whether or not we as human beings have the right to kill. Whether or not we as human beings deserve to decide who lives and who dies. And the answer to that is no. There are many arguments against the death penalty but this is the one I feel strongest about.
While it seems very counterintuitive, killing an inmate via the death penalty is actually more costly to the taxpayer than life imprisonment. In California alone, banning the death penalty will save the state $5 billion dollars over the next 20 years. I understand those people who want revenge or "an eye for an eye" but it makes so much more sense to ban the death penalty.
Ethically I would say it is wrong for one person to take the life of another, regardless of what our justice system dictates as okay. Since the death penalty is a huge ethical issue I believe it is fine for any state to ban the death penalty for any reason they deem necessary.
When the people get out and vote for something, the state simply obeys. If the voters say to ban the death penalty, that is what will happen. That is the privilege of being a state. Those states that ignore their voters tend to change leadership rather quickly. That is how democracy works. The death penalty works in some states and not in others.
The death penalty can be used as a deterrent for 1st degree murder. It brings justice to the victims, and shows to the perpetrators that they will never see the light of day and pay for their actions. Life in prison does not give as much justice, and states can add ridiculous reform programs such as the revolving door policy. Capital punishment makes sure that perpetrators do not harm anybody else ever again.
I believe that a painful death brings dread. The victims and their families get revenge. Think about the hatfields and McCoys. There was no death penalty for the first crime so the McCoys took revenge. (sorry if I have this mixed Up). This ended Up with a brutal massacre. This could have been avoided if the hatfields were killed legally.
First off, how does it make sense for a murderer to be imprisoned for life, we the tax payers, paying thousands of dollars over his imprisonment. In addition it does not cost more for a prisoner to be killed then to imprison him, are you serious with that comment, a firing squad of three people with 3 bullets costing no much more then a few dollars can get the job done humanly even though they probably don't deserve better.
It does not make sense for states to ban the death penalty for capital murder cases because a murder has still been committed. As long as a murder was not committed in self-defense or has extenuating circumstances, all of the states should allow the death penalty for capital murder. This punishment acts as a good deterrent for future murders.
It does not make sense to ban the death penalty for capital murder cases at all. This would limit the amount of punishment options in the case if the accused is found guilty. Capital murder is a serious crime that could possibly warrant the death penalty. That is why we should not ban it.