years in between the sentence and the actual execution. Trial courts cost and prison costs amassed while awaiting execution, total up to large sums of money. Additionally, there are costs for prosecution and defense. Comparing the cost of the death penalty to a life sentence makes the sentence of life imprisonment sound like a good arrangement. Is it really worth the hassle and money to kill a criminal, when we can put them away for life for less money with a great deal more ease? The death penalty needs to be revised and altered so that it is more cost and time efficient. Supporters of the death penalty claim, is that it is just retribution for someone who commits the heinous crime of murder. The death penalty assures that the convicted murderer is being paid back for his or her wrongdoing, and revenge has been accomplished. If the state is interested in executing convicted killers in order to teach them the high value that society holds for human life, doing so doesnt accomplish this. Killing a person to show him killing another is wrong is an injustice in itself (Zimring 76). The archaic view of "an eye for an eye" is expressed often by supporters of the death penalty, yet this view is not associated with any other crimes. A court would find it difficult to sentence a rapist to suffer a sentence of rape, as they would have trouble burning down the house of someone who was convicted of arson. These punishments would undoubtedly be considered as cruel and unusual, and would never be permitted in todays society. The same views should be held regarding the death penalty. In addition, the executing of a killer to enact revenge will never bring back the life of a victim. At some point, the violence must be stopped. The most common rationale for support of the death penalty is that of deterrence. Logically, a person who knows that they might be executed if they are convicted of a capital crime will think twice before committing the offense....
