In 1976, capital punishment was reinstated in the United States, four years after it was struck down. Since then, this topic has been extremely controversial. States have argued over whether or not this was the humane and/or productive way to fix the rate of crime in the country. In my opinion, it has been proven tenfold that this process is neither productive, cost-effective nor morally right.
According to the Death Penalty Information Center in Mississippi, taxpayers spend $102.27 per day to house a death row inmate, as opposed to $41.61 per day for other inmates. California could save $1 billion over five years by replacing the death penalty with permanent imprisonment. People wonder why it’s so expensive to live in the U.S. The death penalty may well be a large part of that problem.
Not only is this way of conviction expensive, but how can one be sure that the person being executed isn’t innocent? Sure, there are plenty of circumstances where the evidence stacks too high for anyone to mistake the difference between the innocent and the guilty. But, at the same time, we as humans are prone to making mistakes and being easily deceived due to things such as racism, biases, preconceived notions, etc.
For example, when the jury is chosen for a trial, every person is asked if there is anything that would interfere with their ability to be fair and impartial whilst making their decision on what should happen to those involved in the case. While humans are fallible, they are also deceivers. For all we know, every person put on jury for a case considering the death penalty could be set on terminating the life of the accused.
According to Amnesty International, since 1973 over 130 people have been released from death rows throughout the country due to evidence of their wrongful convictions. In 2003 alone, 10 wrongfully convicted defendants were released from death row.
One example of these horribly wrongful convictions lies in Jonathon Hoffman’s story. He was convicted and sentenced to death in 1995 for killing the owner of a jewelry store. The main witness was Hoffman’s cousin. However, he made deals with the prosecutors for testifying against his cousin. Twelve years later, he came clean and confessed that he just wanted to get back at his cousin for owing him money.
Putting all facts aside, let us look at this from a religious point of view. Are we God? Seeing as that answer is a resounding, “No,” what rights have we to decide who lives and who dies? Granted, the person being accused of murder had no right to make that decision either, but I am a firm believer in the saying, “Everything happens for a reason.” And he or she will pay for their choice to kill, whether or not they are given the death sentence.
I am in no way trying to change the point of view of my readers. I am simply stating my opinion and hoping that it will perhaps shed some new light on the situation for a few people. So next time a capital punishment case is covered on television or in the newspaper, think twice before automatically condemning them to capital punishment. There is always a better option than murder.
