Practical Arguments Against The Death Penalty

There are a number of practical arguments made for the death penalty. Because the death penalty is such a powerful construct, many argue that it decreases crime rates through deterrence. While many believe that the death penalty is more of a deterrent than a lengthy prison sentence, the very concept of ‘deterrence’ is argued by many as inapplicable to criminal psychology, especially if mental illness is involved. Criminals rarely think about the consequences of their actions and this is especially true with crimes of passion.

By killing felons, the death penalty removes the burden of housing them within the penitentiary system. Prison overcrowding and overstretched resources are key issues in prisons in many countries. Due to the severity of prisoners’ crimes on death row, it costs much more to feed, house, and seclude these often dangerous inmates than if they were simply put to death. And if they were paroled, there is always the chance they could re-offend, which is completely eliminated with the death penalty. The concept of retribution, that the perpetrator is punished in a manner fitting to the crime, is also used to support the death penalty.

The Death Penalty: Con

It is very difficult to know the exact moral status of the death penalty, though many see it to be a degrading, barbaric, and amoral. The opponents of the death penalty argue that it causes incredible suffering and pain for the sentenced and brutalizes society as a whole where it operates. Both of these factors could have negative effects on crime and criminality. The vast majority of people would at least argue that human life is highly valuable and should be preserved, though the extent at which preservation should make-way for retribution is where things become very