How the Death Penalty Works and Shocking Facts That Might Make You Reconsider It

There are numerous steps taken before the Death Penalty is decided for any specific offender. All the steps and also the amount of time they take do protect the rights of the offender. A long trial takes place first to decide whether or not the person on trial has committed the crime. If convicted, then a separate trial takes place to decide the punishment. If the Death Penalty is being pushed the the prosecution the offender has the right to present his case in court. Any factors that might make him not worthy of death are seen by the jury before they make their choice. If the jury decides to use the death sentence in a particular case, the offender is still not out of luck. He then can appeal his sentence. If the offenders first try is not successful, he can try appealing again to the Supreme Court. All of these appeals are multi step processes with all the factors are looked at again to confirm the decision to execute.

In America's past, there have been five main methods of execution. All of them seem "cruel and unusual" except lethal injection. Hanging, shooting, electrocution, and gas chambers all seem too torturous to me. It all seems backwards and wrong. It screams savage to me and I like to think my government is above that. The reason lethal injection is not as bad is because the person is first put to sleep and therefore unconscious when they are paralyzed and go into cardiac arrest. This method seems pain free and therefore less brutal. It also has the lowest possibility of mistakes than the others. Some other methods either are not instantaneous, or mistakes can be easily made making the death that was supposed to be instantaneous not instantaneous anymore. If it was up to me though, all forms of the death penalty is "cruel and unusual" punishment since a less extreme punishment that has the same effect is always possible. Life in prison keeps the offender from harming the rest of society anymore without having to kill the offender.
According to deathpenaltycurriculum.org the homicide rate is pretty similar in most of the states with a large population and similar lower rates in states with smaller populations. This is no direct relationship with homicide rates and states that use the death penalty. This highlights the idea that the death penalty is arbitrary. Having the death penalty does not show a decrease in the homicide rate, therefore is killing someone after they have already killed someone necessary. Again, they will be of no harm to society if locked up in jail their whole life.
Back when the death penalty was legal in Illinois, there statutes for crimes resulting in possible death sentences   were not anything horrible. It goes into detail basically on any type of murder that someone commits. Murder being premeditated, and not manslaughter which would be an on the spot impulse. None of the conditions on the statute struck me as "the punishment did not fit the crime". The fact that I'm against the death penalty is based on other points. So then why did Illinois abolish the death sentence? According to the Death Penalty Information Center, there have been 20 people in the state of Illinois freed from death row on the count that they were innocent all along. 20 people may not seem like a lot at first. Picture yourself on death row, knowing you are innocent. 20 people were set free, but I have to wonder how many never got that lucky. There must have been many people who were killed that were in fact innocent. To be honest, even just one mistake is one too many. Taking an innocent life is unimaginable, which was why the death penalty was created in the first place. However, my home state of Illinois probably realized the irony in the death penalty and that it has killed innocent people. This is perhaps one of the reasons Illinois does not use the death penalty anymore.
Some more reasons to be against the death penalty:
-"88% of experts rejected the notion that the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder."
-"A study in California found that those who killed whites were over 3 times more likely to be sentenced to death that those who killed blacks."
- The South has the highest most executions, but also the highest homicide rate.
-"The California death penalty system costs taxpayers $114 million per year beyond the costs of keeping convicts locked up for life."
- Source: Death Penalty Information Center
What do all of these facts mean? First, that the death penalty does not directly prevent people from killing. Second, that getting sentenced to death might not be just based on the crime, but also based on race. And third, for those of you who argue you don't want your tax money to go to some inmate, you might want to reconsider the idea that executing someone might cost more than keeping them locked up their whole life. For the record, if you find money more important than the value of a life you have other problems to deal with than your thoughts on the death penalty anyways.