There is no margin of error there is a minute amount of mistakes that have been made with the death penalty, over the 200 year period maybe 12 total people have been proven innocent and each one was on death row and not dead. What margin of error? If anything we should stop for economic reasons.
It's incredibly hard to get wrongfully convicted and be put on Death Row. It's also incredibly hard to determine who is wrongfully convicted. But if we assume that the 4% figure, of all supposed criminals are wrongfully convicted , is carried over to Death Row. That's about 1,320 since the 1970s. I really doubt that that many innocents died. However, we can firmly say NOW that being wrongfully convicted of such a high crime, that it gets the death penalty, is extremely unlikely.
We spend way more on prisons than we do on homeless. It takes a veryserious offense to even consider the death penalty and even if convicted you get appeal after appeal which continually sucks the taxpayer dry. And just because you don't see it in your neighboorhood it doesn't mean that extreme violent behavior doesn't exist in America. This country is extremely racist and people are very greedy. Wives kill or divorce husbands just for the simple goal of taking everything he has. Plus the fact that the majority of innocents aren't on death row. They are just in jail. And the ones that aren't innocent do you want to constantly take money that could be used for a homeless person and support them with it? Or better yet why don't you just let them back out into society so they can do it again. It's stayed for a reason and should remain in place.
I agree that anyone who deserves this punishment should get it... Its that simple. That doesn't mean people in debt etc. should get killed, but with dna tests and advancements in proving guilty vs innocent it should make it obvious who deserves it
fun fact: each prisoner we kill saves $1mil in our tax system that could be used in schools that prevent violence
Of course every effort must be made to ensure that verdicts are rendered fairly and accurately. However, capital punishment must always be an available option. How many times would we see someone appealing a lengthy jail sentence and being ultimately released, if they were imprisoned instead? Even without taking into account the cost, it just can't be allowed.
It is too much of a risk. Even one innocent person is NOT worth the death penalty.
In more volatile societies where a message against some behavior desperately needs to be sent then I could see the death penalty as justified. For example India can and should and does use the death penalty for cases of rape. Since there is a culture there where some people even support rape I applaud that policy. It makes sense within India's special context.
In countries where homophobia and religious extremism and racism are rampant it would make sense for violent hate crimes based on sexuality or religion or race to get the death penalty too if a regime opposed to homophobia and religious extremism and racism were ever to take power yet the public still remained largely backwards in their thinking.
Even with DNA being a much stronger indicator of guilt than eye witnesses and finger prints, I still don't think it's worth the risk of killing an innocent person. I think life in prison is more than enough punishment and it feels inhumane for a country such as the United States to still be putting people to death.
Rather than sticking to the current system, the US should make amends in its practice of capital punishment so to make it less vulnerable to mistakes. It has been observed that there's a rather huge margin of error and that this basically leads to a lot of convictions of, sometimes, the innocent people and thus, amendments should be made and until then, the system should not be abolished.
As strange as it sounds, it is true that the states would save a ton of money just keeping these inmates in prison for life rather than executing them. California, for example, would save $1 billion over five years by replacing the death penalty with permanent imprisonment. This would also solve the problem of executing someone proven to be innocent after the fact which happens way more than it should.
There really is nothing else to it. The system is archaic and specific to a time when humans really had no choice but to slay menaces to society particularly because the prison system of yesterday was far worse and the legal system was far less expansive. The margin of error is a good reason to not allow the death penalty but honestly the only time it should be instituted is if you have persons who will not stop slaying other persons such as serial killers. The severity of a crime should play less of a role than it's likely repetition.
Many civilized countries have now removed the death penalty as a form of punishment because of its finality and its vulnerability to errors. Juries make mistakes, and "beyond reasonable doubt" is eroding away. Just a single innocent life that is extinguished early is enough to put the entire process into question. The US criminal system is SUPPOSED to be about rehabilitation, but is rapidly shifting towards revenge and punishment. Revenge and punishment based systems do little to deter crime, not to mention waste a lot of money.