In 1976, the death penalty was reinstated in the United States. Since then, the execution of criminals has been reactivated in state after state, using methods such as electrocution, lethal injection, and firing squads. These legal killings have been the center of an American debate that surfaced with the conviction and sentencing of Timothy McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing. I believe that reinstating the death penalty was wrong. First off, let us bring up the popular claim of death penalty defenders, that the execution of one criminal for his crimes will scare others from committing a crime. But think about our history for a moment, and you will see this to be defective logic. The death penalty has existed on our world in many forms since time began, and in many countries avoidance of "cruel and unusual punishment" is not a consideration. But we have seen the world crime rate climb, with crimes becoming more and more terrible and violent than ever before. It should be obvious to all that our current methods are not working, and are in desperate need of improvement. Another argument that persists amongst the bloodthirsty is the financial benefits of the death penalty. The very suggestion of using saved tax dollars to support the pro-death penalty argument should be a nauseating idea to all concerned. Were you aware that it costs around three million dollars per execution? Those with political yearnings take advantage of this unfortunate understanding; they all think the convicted are living it up in American prisons, splurging the taxpayer's money as they watch cable TV and pump iron in weight rooms. But prisons are not the lap of luxury. To claim that these so-called "excesses" that is costing the people could be strong and solid by allowing the death penalty to remain on the books. It is not only disgusting and inhumane, but ridiculous as well. The average number of about 300 executions ca...
