How can I defend that life imprisonment is better than death penalty?

Question

This is for our debate tomorrow.

Answer 1

Here are some of the reasons. These are all verifiable and sourced facts about the death penalty.

Re: Alternatives
48 states have life without parole on the books. It means what it says, is swift and sure and is rarely appealed. Being locked in a tiny cell for 23 hours a day, forever, is certainly no picnic. Life without parole incapacitates a killer (keeps him from re-offending) and costs considerably less than the death penalty.

Re: Possibility of executing an innocent person
Over 120 people on death rows have been released with evidence of their innocence. Many had already served over 2 decades on death row. If we speed up the process we are bound to execute an innocent person. Once someone is executed the case is closed. If we execute an innocent person we are not likely to find that out and, also, the real criminal is still out there.

Re: DNA
DNA is available in no more than 10% of murder cases. It is not a miracle cure for sentencing innocent people to death. It’s human nature to make mistakes.

Re: Appeals
Our appeals system is designed to make sure that the trial was in accord with constitutional standards, not to second guess whether the defendant was actually innocent. It is very difficult to get evidence of innocence introduced before an appeals court.

Re: Deterrence
The death penalty isn’t a deterrent. Murder rates are actually higher in states with the death penalty than in states without it. Moreover, people who kill or commit other serious crimes do not think they will be caught (if they think at all.)

Re: cost
The death penalty costs far more than life in prison. The huge extra costs start to mount up even before the trial. There are more cost effective ways to prevent and control crime.

Re: Who gets the death penalty
The death penalty isn’t reserved for the “worst of the worst,” but rather for defendants with the worst lawyers. When is the last time a wealthy person was sentenced to death, let alone executed??

Re: Victims families
The death penalty is very hard on victims’ families. They must relive their ordeal in the courts and the media. Life without parole is sure, swift and rarely appealed. Some victims families who support the death penalty in principal prefer life without parole because of how the death penalty affects families like theirs.

Opposing the death penalty doesn’t mean you condone brutal crimes or excuse people who commit them. According to a Gallup Poll, in 2006, 47% of all Americans prefer capital punishment while 48% prefer life without parole. Americans are learning the facts and making up their minds using common sense, not revenge or an eye for an eye mentality.

Answer 2

Life imprisonment is better punishment than the death penalty. Why? Because, in the case that a ruling was wrong, or evidence shows up showing that a person was wrongly convicted, they will be freed, and have a second chance. If you killed them, you run the chance of killing an innocent and only finding out they were innocent afterwards. Down side is costs for keeping them alive etc...
However, I hear that people in jail can still do work within the confines of the wall though I am uncertain of the truth of this. If it is true, then they can still be productive members of society.

Answer 3

Actually, there are pros and cons to both sides of the argument. There were cases around the world where death penalty was given to people who were later found to be innocent, or who didn't deserve such a punishment where a lighter verdict could have sufficed. For the death penalty to be enforced, the justice system must be righteously upheld.

Anyway, as far as I can see it, the only advantage of a prisoner who is alive is his labor. I have read in the link below about how much more expensive it is to carry out executions than have the criminals carry out life sentences. I don't know about the viability of this statement..... most probably you will need to do further research on this.

Finally, it might be best to ask the criminals themselves if they agree to death sentence or not. If I were one (which I'm most definitely not,) I wouldn't want it. But if we are talking about a Hannibal-Lecter type of criminal, then good riddance!!!

Answer 4

In totality, you can't. Life in prison are for those without a criminal past. The death penalty is for repeat offenders, or for those who committed an heinous crime. Charles Manson was given the death penalty, then was commuted to life when the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional as written in 1972. He deserved the death penalty. No hope of rehabilitation for him. Scott Peterson was sentenced to death. He should have been put into the General population, not coddled on death row for the next 20 years. Either way, all murderers will die in prison, whether by other inmates, death penalty, or old age. Each case needs to be decided on its own merits.

Answer 5

If you want to talk finances:
--Death penalty trials cost an average of 48% more than the average cost of trials in which prosecutors seek life imprisonment.
--A New Jersey Policy Perspectives report concluded that the state's death penalty has cost taxpayers $253 million since 1983, a figure that is over and above the costs that would have been incurred had the state utilized a sentence of life without parole instead of death.

Not a deterrant:
The majority of states with the death penalty have higher murder rates than those that do not:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=12&did=169

A minimum of 124 people sentenced to death have been found innocent.

A study by Columbia University professor James Liebman examined thousands of capital sentences that had been reviewed by courts in 34 states from 1973 to 1995. "An astonishing 82 percent of death row inmates did not deserve to receive the death penalty," he said in his conclusion. "One in twenty death row inmates is later found not guilty."

The imposition of a death sentence has more to do with where the crime was committed and where the capital trial took place rather than the facts of the actual case.

Answer 6

Here are five often cited reasons against:

1. The possibility of error
Sometimes a person might be put to death who is innocent.

2. Unfair administration
Capital punishment is inflicted disproportionately on the poor and minorities.

3. Weakness of the argument from deterrence.
The claim that the threat of capital punishment reduces violent crime is inconclusive, certainly not proven, extremely difficult to disprove, and morally suspect if any case.

4. The length of stay on death row
If there were ever any validity to the deterrence argument, it is negated by the endless appeals, delays, technicalities, and retrials that keep persons condemned to death waiting for execution for years on end. One of the strongest arguments right now against capital punishment is that we are too incompetent to carry it out. That incompetence becomes another injustice.

5. Mitigating circumstances
Persons who commit vicious crimes have often suffered from neglect, emotional trauma, violence, cruelty, abandonment, lack of love, and a host of destructive social conditions. These extenuating circumstances may have damaged their humanity to the point that it is unfair to hold them fully accountable for their wrongdoing. Corporate responsibility somehow has to be factored in to some degree. No greater challenge to social wisdom exists than this.

Answer 7

In the past the real bad people are killed by the prison population when the sentence is life. If your guy is a bad guy isn't it more humane to end his life as an example of the punishment that come with the horrific act. I know there is a cost to the appeal and most criminals are forced to appeal. Timothy Mc Veigh is the example of how to go with dignity.

Answer 8

Because it lets them have a chance someday to kill again when the government decides that life imprisonment is cruel and unusual. There are a lot of murderers who got out after being sentenced to "life."
This way at least they get a chance to get back into society and kill some more people. That stupid death penalty stops that from happening and that's not fair to them. They like to kill and who are we to stand in their way?

Answer 9

Personally, I think life in prison is cruel and unusual. Think about it: Stuck in one room for the rest of your life? Bound to make you go mad in a hurry. But I digress.....

Points to make in your argument
1. The state will never again kill a innocent man
2. If you believe in the fundamental goodness of human beings, than killing someone would deprive the world of that person's possible contributions after they are reformed.
3. a dead man can't reform.


Actually life in prison to me shows us that we have no moral regard for life. If a person makes the decision to kill another than they have forfeited that right to life that is found so famously in the Declaration of Independence. But good luck with the debate.

Answer 10

lol, im for the death penalty - but i do know a lot of things that go against it...we can have a little debate for you to practice, IM me :D i love debating!!!

-- i dont mean to oog you out by asking you to IM me, one thing that makes the death penalty bad is it costs a lot of tax payers money, because the person who commited the crime will want to appeal it.