Many argue whether the death sentence is moral or not, or the justified choice to determine upon a person if they should be killed or not. There are many factors about the death penalty that come into play, from race to moral and even cost of the execution against the cost of life imprisonment. The main argument, however about the death sentence is if we have a right to take away someones life and to be “playing God”. The amount of people executed in some countries is completely unnecessary, in China alone, over 4000 people were executed in 2012. The thought of the death penalty is simple really, if the accused person is too dangerous to be around society without endangering those around them, then society has the right to eliminate them. …show more content…
People who have been given the life imprisonment sentence are in prison for all their life or at the minimum of 30 years before they can chance parole. People on death row on average are on trial for 190 months. The reason for the long time in prison while waiting on death row is because the lengthy laws and such that make it impossible to execute someone in a relatively short amount of time since they were convicted.
One last similarity between the two forms of punishment is not the easiest to see. If you were to take the killing out of the death sentence, it would still be capital punishment. If the convicted people were not on death row, they would be restraint for the rest of their life. That fact leads to the argument whether it is better to be caged for the rest of your life or to be killed.
Some differences between the two are much more obvious than similarities. The biggest difference being if we have the right to take away somebody's life, ironic considering the fact that most of them murdered someone to get placed on death row. The major argument in that statement being that “God” gave them life therefore we do not have the right to take it away from