It is called the deathless death penalty issue.  Well, it should be deathless as long as people get educated more and more about it.  Here are some arguments for those who think death penalty is well and good as a measure of justice.

1. 
   

   The argument that murderers are the least likely of all criminals to repeat their crimes is not only irrelevant, but also increasingly false.  Six percent of young adults paroled in 1978 after having been convicted of murder were arrested for murder again within 6 years of release. (”Recidivism of Young Parolees,” 4, 1987, BJS). Murderers have so violated the human rights of their victims and of society that it should be a moral imperative that they never again have that opportunity.
    

2. Obviously, those executed can’t murder again. In the United States of the roughly 52,000 state prison inmates serving time for murder in 1984, an estimated 810 had previously been convicted of murder and had killed 821 persons following their previous murder convictions. Executing each of these inmates would have saved 821 lives.” (41, 1 Stanford Law Review, 11/88, pg. 153)  Using a 75% murder clearance rate, it is most probable that the actual number of lives saved would have been 1026, or fifty times the number legally executed that year. This suggests that some 10,000 persons have been murdered, since 1971, by those who had previously committed additional murders.
3. Death Penalty opponents claim taht ther is a “brutalization effect” with executions, meaning, taht executions show a low regard for human life and do, thereby, cause an increase in the murder rate.  If the brutalization effect is real, it would be the only known legal sanction to cause an increase in wrongful behavior.  Why would criminals become more likely to engage in illegal activities because the punishments for those activities become more severe?  How absurd.  Have dramatic increases in the rates of incarceration resulted in dramatic increases in kidnappings?  Just the opposite.  Further denouncing the brutalization effect is the fact that many repected studies show that executions do produce an individual and a general deterrent effect.  And, there is, of course, common sense.
   

Now, for the anti-death penalty advocates, here are your argumentative stuff.

Capital punishment denies due process of law. Its imposition is arbitrary and irrevocable. It forever deprives an individual of benefits of new evidence or new law that might warrant the reversal of a conviction or the setting aside of a death sentence.

The death penalty violates the constitutional guarantee of the equal protection of the laws. It is applied randomly at best and discriminatorily at worst. It is imposed disproportionately upon those whose victims are white, on offenders who are people of color, and on those who are themselves poor and uneducated.

Executions give society the unmistakable message that human life no longer deserves respect when it is useful to take it and that homicide is legitimate when deemed justified by pragmatic concerns.

Reliance on the death penalty obscures the true causes of crime and distracts attention from the social measures that effectively contribute to its control. Politicians who preach the desirability of executions as a weapon of crime control deceive the public and mask their own failure to support anti-crime measures that will really work.

May the little learning you got here won’t be a dangerous thing but become a liberating thing.  If you need more, click here.