Death Penalty, Murder or Justice? Does a person that commits a heinous crime do they deserve the death penalty? I believe that the death penalty is perfectly suitable for criminals that commit heinous actions. When describing a heinous crime you may use word like extremely evil or horrible. The death penalty really has many things that are debated when this topic is brought up: morality, constitutionally, the cost of death verse the cost of life in prison, and finally retribution. For example Charles Mason and the actions committed by himself and what he called his “family” the reason I chose Charlie Manson as an example is because almost everyone has probably heard of him or has heard his name before many people don't know the details of the case, but this is considered one of the most heinous crimes of the 20th century. Yet Charley Manson is still alive and living out the rest of it in maximum security prison in California named San Quentin. The reason he is still alive is because California doesn't not allow capital punishment. One night in August of 1969 the heinous murders that were committed in the hill of Hollywood, California in the residency of the Tate’s that night five people lost there life Sharon Tate a young beautiful actress, Jay Sebring a Hollywood hairstylist, Wojciech Frykowski a screenwriter and friend of Sharon's husband …show more content…
Convicts that have LWOP cost more because we have to feed them, bed them, and provide them with the necessities of life. If it cost two million dollars to put a serial kill to death yes it more for the first few years but ten years after the murder and have been in prison the funding of LWOP is significantly higher than it was when they could have put him to