When the death penalty laws were first established in eighteenth century B.C. William the Conqueror only allowed those that committed murder to be hung, this one stipulation began a long and controversial debate. Over the next few decades and into our current society today, crime rates have only increased and the severity has extended beyond just the few capital offenses that were once thought to be extreme. Most cases punishable by death in today's society include multiple variations of murder, but also espionage, treason, and death resulting from hijacking. Although the decision in court is a normal part of society, a decision never comes easy to any jury. In order for someone to be convicted and put on death row the jury must be unanimous where every person out of the 12 selected, agree with convicting the defendant of the questionable crime. Even though the death penalty gives an ease to some of the families who lost loved ones, the death penalty should be diminished because it violates the eighth amendment in the United States Constitution which prohibits the federal government from imposing cruel and unusual punishment, the cost of sentencing an individual to death row far outweighs the cost of sentencing an individual to live in prison without parole, and there is no known evidence that the death penalty deters any crime.

The constitution was written because this document outlies our freedom as people of the United States, it protects our rights as individuals, and helped to establish a more perfect union within this nation. The constitution applies specific powers to different branches of government allowing the branches to apply what they deem necessary dealing with issues, such as laws. With the case of capital punishment at hand, eighth amendment analysis requires that courts consider evolving ideas of what is considered cruel and unusual punishment. This means that courts look for specific factors within the case in accordance with what is considered cruel and unusual and then make independent evaluations based on whether the case in question is reasonable enough to receive the death penalty (Cornell School Death Penalty Project). The most common form of execution is lethal injection which involves three different substances: the first, sodium thiopental is used an induced anesthesia, followed by pancuronium bromide which is used to relax the muscles, and finally potassium chloride which stops the heart (Motluk, 2005).  It has been examined that post-mortem blood levels of individuals on death row, shows that prisoners may have been capable of feeling pain in almost 90% of cases (Motluk, 2005). There has been evidence that lethal injection can cause pain, in some cases executions have lasted anywhere from 20 minutes to over an hour, and prisoners have been seen by multiple eye witnesses saying they were grasping for air and having body convulsions during death (Lethal Injection-Amnesty International). Another huge problem dealing with lethal injection is the fact that it violates multiple principles involving medical ethics. When bringing ethics into the light of capital punishment, it is often considered that health professional participation be inactive during execution. However, many professionals are required by law in states to assist in executions and in some cases carry out the deaths (Lethal Injection-Amnesty International). With ethics at hand, it's immoral and inhumane to participate in an execution, even if it is done painlessly, but its hard for medical professionals to deal with executions considering that their job mission is to be life-affirming (Dr. Daniel P. Sulmasy, CNN Health). In accordance with the Constitution, without cruel and unusual punishment, executions would be considered humane. The term "humane execution" in the year 2016 is not what it says to be, the humane killing of an individual is something that specifically can not be achieved. Executions have gone from hanging, to the electric chair, to the gas chamber, to the firing squad, and now to lethal injection all because one is thought to be more humane than another. No individual, with power or without can say that taking the life of another individual is humane, because the fact is the debate surrounding the death penalty can never end unless the term "humane" is removed from the debate all together (CNN Health, Highlights). 

Additionally, the cost of the death penalty far outweighs sentencing an individual to life in prison without the possibility of parole. The Constitution requires that there is a long and complex judicial process involved with capital cases to ensure that no innocent man or women is executed for a crime they did not commit, yet even with this process there is no way to fully eliminate the risk of killing an innocent individual (Death Penalty Focus, Alternatives to the Death Penalty). If the death penalty were replaced with the sentence of life-imprisonment without the possibility of parole then it would not only save states millions of dollars but it also protects the individuals of the public and eliminates the possibility of executing the innocent (Death Penalty Focus, alternatives to the Death penalty). The cost of death row inmates does not lie on a single and simple ground but instead is complex and involves specific details. With death penalty costs on the rise we can attribute these costs from, but not limited to the endless hours of attorney pay, unpredictability on the verdict, juries, and housing of the convicted. As time has gone on over the past few decades and as the capital court cases have become much more extreme and complicated, attornies have had to bring on more staff for certain cases causing the money an attorney makes per hour to raise higher than $100 per hour, just in 2007 (Chammah, 2014). With the question of whether the death penalty is cruel or unusual punishment based off of the Constitution, the U.S. Supreme Court created new standards in which prosecutors and attorneys have to work in order for the death sentence to remain on the grounds of what is constitutional (Chammah, 2014). When dealing with a capital case there are often multiple outcomes that may be overlooked. An example is with "David Powell who was executed in 2010 for the shooting of a police officer. His death sentence was reversed twice and this in turn made the county pay for not just one trial but for three separate trials" (Chammah, 2014).  After multiple studies there was one published by Judge Arthur L. Alarcon and Attorney Paula Mitchell that provided evidence that the jury in a death penalty case could cost roughly $200,000 more than compared to that of other trials because of the amount of time they are needed for a specific case (Chammah, 2014). As support for the death penalty declines, the cost it takes to maintain the attorney's, judge, and juries becomes much more evident. The fact is that it's hard in this day in age to find people who are willing to impose the death penalty (Chammah, 2014). Criminals that have been sentenced to life in prison, eventually get placed in the general population because the costs are far more intensified for those on death row than those in regular prison. The cost of a regular prisoner is less than half of what it costs to house a death row inmate. With the heightened levels of security needed in solitary confinement, the costs per year to house a prisoner on death row is $49,380, compared to that of the general population which costs about $24,690 (Chammah, 2014). Over the past few years less and less executions have taken place, forcing the prisoners on death row to sit while the costs stack up. In the United States the largest death row population is in the state California, after a study it was found that the yearly cost of housing and medical care for the state's inmates comes to $184 million (Chammah, 2014). The opposition to this specific argument is that there are a select few that just don't understand everything that goes into the lengthy trials of capital punishment, their views are clouded by the fact that they have to pay for those in jail. The one thing that counteracts this argument though is the fact that it costs a lot more to execute someone than to keep them in prison. After looking at various studies the conclusions all seem to be the same, it costs U.S. taxpayers between $50 and $90 million dollars more per year to prosecute the death penalty. Another reason to diminish the death penalty is the DNA evidence and genetic testing, experts are not required by law to testify on DNA evidence, yet this valuable tool has helped to save multiple innocent lives, therefore making this a concrete part of the lengthy trials and driving up more costs. There is ultimately no way to drive down the costs with the death penalty still in the picture, while many would just say that the appeals need to be cut, at the same time this violates the rights granted to every American that are laid out in the Constitution (HG.org, What is cheaper? Execution or Life in Prison). 

In the past several years there has been a significant decline in the amount of executions that have taken place within the United States. Focusing in on one state in particular which is North Carolina, in the year 2012 for the first time, no one received the death penalty and no one has been executed since 2006. One specific piece of evidence that is somewhat shocking is the fact that since the state has stopped executing individuals in capital cases there has actually been a decline in the amount of crimes that have occurred, therefore making the argument that capital punishment deters crime, ultimately invalid. Most individuals that remain on death row committed their crimes while under the influence, in the heat of the moment, or while suffering from a mental illness. These types of people didn't fear the fact that their actions would have consequences. Mental Illness is most often defined as having "any various conditions characterized by impairment of an individual's normal cognitive, emotional, or behavioral functioning, and caused by social, psychological, biochemical, genetic, or other factors, such as infection or head trauma" (Death Penalty Focus, Working alternatives to the Death Penalty). A leading mental health group in America, estimates that five to ten percent of all death row inmates suffer from a severe mental illness (ACLU, Mental Illness and the Death Penalty). One of the main pleads for the mentally ill is that of "insanity," where the individual in question is required to take the "M'Naghten test" "that asks whether the defendant was unable to understand what he or she was doing at the time of the crime due to some "defect of reason or disease of the mind" or, if he or she was aware of what she was doing, that he or she failed to understand that what he or she was doing was wrong" (ACLU, Mental Illness and the Death Penalty). The second most used test is the American Law Institute test that asks under a common ground if the person in question knows whether what they are doing is right or wrong (ACLU, Mental Illness and the Death Penalty). With both tests in question, juries often reject the insanity defenses in capital cases despite the evidence that supports the defendant was suffering from a serious mental illness at the time of the crime (ACLU, Mental Illness and the Death Penalty). In recent years, legislation has been passed with stipulations on the fact that juvenile or mentally retarded individuals can no longer be executed.  With intense and rigorous review of various studies it has been shown that the death penalty under no circumstances reduces crime. After reviewing national studies, it has been shown that murder rates are significantly lower in states that don't use the death penalty. An interesting survey was conducted in 2008 that involved police chiefs from across the country, where they ranked effective crime fighting tools. It was concluded that they ranked capital punishment at the bottom of the list and found that they believed more law enforcement resources is the best option for reducing violent crime (Tomatillo Design, 2016). 

Indeed, while the death penalty gives an ease to the families who lost loved ones, the cons exceed the pros tremendously and capital punishment should be diminished. While many of us are unable to feel the justice that families believe is served when the person who is responsible for the death of their loved one is sentenced to death themselves, it is still one of the driving factors behind the people who still support capital punishment today. There are not enough words in the world to fill the pain in someone's heart that was once filled with their loved one who is now gone. The debate on capital punishment will continue to be controversial until capital punishment itself is diminished, it's more than just whether or not there is a violation of the constitution, or whether or not it's draining America's money, or even whether or not studies show that it deters crime. The capital punishment debate is a long and complex argument filled with multiple aspects such as remorse, guilt, justice, humanity and so much more. The main issue is who chooses what is humane or not, and who gets to decide if justice needs to be served or not. The American Justice system is corrupt in the ways that a single individual can understand. With society evolving, there is just not a further need for capital punishment to exist. It does not help society in any known ways, but it does cause problems such as the fact that there is no known evidence to support deterrence, millions of dollars go into capital trials, and also there is also a possibility of convicting an innocent man or woman. 

