Life In Prison Or Death Penalty?

I'm American and my answer is based on the system we have here.

For the worst crimes, life without parole is better, for many reasons. I’m against the death penalty not because of sympathy for criminals but because it doesn’t reduce crime, prolongs the anguish of families of murder victims, costs a whole lot more than life in prison, and, worst of all, risks executions of innocent people.

The worst thing about it. Errors:

The system can make tragic mistakes. In 2004, Cameron Todd Willingham was executed for setting the fire that killed his children, based on what even the Texas Forensics Science Commission acknowledges was junk science. Modern forensics has shown the fire was accidental, not arson. We’ll never know for sure how many people have been executed for crimes they didn’t commit. As of now, 140 wrongly convicted people on death row have been exonerated. DNA is rarely available in homicides, often irrelevant (as in Willingham’s case) and can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people. Capital juries are dominated by people who favor the death penalty and are more likely to vote to convict.

Keeping killers off the streets for good:

Life without parole, on the books in most states, also prevents reoffending. It means what it says, and spending the rest of your life locked up, knowing you’ll never be free, is no picnic. Two big advantages:

-an innocent person serving life can be released from prison

-life without parole costs less than the death penalty

Costs, a surprise to many people:

Study after study has found that the death penalty is much more expensive than life in prison. Since the stakes are so high, the process is far more complex than for any other kind of criminal case. The largest costs come at the pre-trial and trial stages. These apply whether or not the defendant is convicted, let alone sentenced to death.

Crime reduction (deterrence):

The death penalty doesn't keep us safer. Homicide rates for states that use the death penalty are consistently higher than for those that don’t. The most recent FBI data confirms this. For people without a conscience, fear of being caught is the best deterrent.

Who gets it:

The death penalty isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn't apply to people with money. Practically everyone sentenced to death had to rely on an overworked public defender. How many people with money have been executed??

Victims:

People assume that families of murder victims want the death penalty imposed. It isn't necessarily so. Some are against it on moral grounds. But even families who have supported it in principle have testified to the protracted and unavoidable damage that the death penalty process does to families like theirs and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.

It comes down to whether we should keep the death penalty for retribution or revenge in spite of its flaws and in spite of the huge toll it exacts on society.

If I were the offender, I would definitely pick death penalty. For a serious offender, I would pick life in prison because it is cheaper and the person is forced to think about what they've done and live with some pretty messed up people in prison for the rest of their lives.

From the viewpoint of the rest of us: For the worst crimes, life without parole is better, for many reasons. I’m against the death penalty not because of sympathy for criminals but because it doesn’t reduce crime, prolongs the anguish of families of murder victims, costs a whole lot more than life in prison, and, worst of all, risks executions of innocent people. The worst thing about it. Errors: The system can make tragic mistakes. As of now, 140 wrongly convicted people on death row have been exonerated. We’ll never know for sure how many people have been executed for crimes they didn’t commit. DNA is rarely available in homicides, often irrelevant and can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people. Keeping killers off the streets for good: Life without parole, on the books in most states, also prevents reoffending. It means what it says, and spending the rest of your life locked up, knowing you’ll never be free, is no picnic. Two big advantages: -an innocent person serving life can be released from prison -life without parole costs less than the death penalty Costs, a big surprise to many people: Study after study has found that the death penalty is much more expensive than life in prison. The process is much more complex than for any other kind of criminal case. The largest costs come at the pre-trial and trial stages. These apply whether or not the defendant is convicted, let alone sentenced to death. Crime reduction (deterrence): Homicide rates for states that use the death penalty are consistently higher than for those that don’t. The most recent FBI data confirms this. For people without a conscience, fear of being caught is the best deterrent. The death penalty is no more effective in deterring others than life sentences. Who gets it: The death penalty isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn't apply to people with money. Practically everyone sentenced to death had to rely on an overworked public defender. Victims: People assume that families of murder victims want the death penalty imposed. t isn't necessarily so. Some are against it on moral grounds. But even families who have supported it in principle have testified to the protracted and unavoidable damage that the death penalty process does to families like theirs and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative. It comes down to whether we should keep the death penalty for retribution or revenge.

A lot would depend upon your interpretation of "serious crime".

If we are talking about murder, then if society is absolutely sure

that the convicted person actually did it, then it would perhaps be

fairer to have the death penalty. Fairer to who? The public purse.

It cost millions of pounds per annum to keep our jails filled with

murderers, why should society pay for them to rot away in a cell

when execution would cut the over all bill?

The problem is, that society wants it's pound of flesh, you killed

my son, so you will stay in prison. But we all know that prison

life is about making the lives of prisoners as easy as possible,

at least in the UK. So we put TV in cells, have gymnasiums,

and other forms of easement on the incarcerated.

Hardliners would say take all of their privileges away, but

if you do that then, the prison officers who guard the inmates

are under threat. Prisoners with nothing to lose, could just

attack those guarding them with impunity.

You pose a good question, but it is one that cannot easily

be resolved, without a host of other questions needing to be

addressed.

You need to specify what the "serious crime" is, also clarify their mental state or whatever, and all the different circumstances of the crime that they committed.

But in a general respect, I think the death penalty can be effective in modern day society for extreme crimes (such as murder etc) and can be used as a bargaining chip for prosecutors when obtaining evidence.

Oh, and it would also wipe out alot of scum on this earth.

For the most heinous crimes i think life in prison because that is a punishment. no to the death penalty, in my opinion it is a cop out. death comes to us all that is a fact of life, so therefore how could death ever be a punishment.

I think they should just get the Death Penalty, I think it's more merciful this way. I know, I know, who are they to receive mercy if they commit a serious crime. But eh, why imprison them if you have no plan of letting them out at all anyway? It's like delaying the inevitable. Besides, killing them would save up space too...... I think.

Life in prison, a post mortem pardon is worthless and there's been too many cases where innocence was proven after death, haven said that prisoners voting and suing the government because their mattress was lumpy should be stopped. prisoners should work and kept busy for 8 hours a day.

If it's life for a rapist or a paedophile then I think it's should be death, I'd rather not pay for them to live in prison

Other crimes I don't think are as simple to say because of mental health etc as the other comment says

life in prison because they will never get the death penalty because it costs so much like $1 million dollars a lot.