The death penalty is a very controversial topic for obvious reasons, everyone has their own opinion on whether it should be used and when it shouldn’t, or possibly that it should never be allowed to be used. The problem with everyone having so many opinions is that often facts and opinions are mixed and exaggerated to get a point across. So I will be writing about how it is less efficient than many pro-death penalty activists say in terms of money, deterrence, and whether it is moral.
My first point is whether the death penalty is effective in terms of money. Pro-death penalty activists often make it out that it would save the government millions but in reality, it is not quite so. "One of the most common misperceptions about the death penalty is the notion that the death penalty saves money because executed defendants no longer have to be cared for at the state's expense.” The former executive director for the death penalty. I did the calculations for a man that gets put on death row vs one that sentences a life in prison, the results
…show more content…
Basically saying that that chance that a criminal should be scared to be given the death penalty and eventually be executed. This ideology is complete wrong first of all, criminals never plan to get caught unless they are planned to break someone out. They always have an escape plan with plans though A-Z. Unless they are a psychopath in watch case they don’t care what happens to them after the crime, they're in it for the thrill of the crime so it really doesn't make a difference what happens to them in the trial. John J Donohue III sums it up pretty well by saying “Any criminal who actually thought he would be caught would find the prospect of life without parole to be a monumental penalty. Any criminal who didn’t think he would be caught would be untroubled by any sanction." So basically it is not an effective deterrent or even a deterrent at