The general purpose of the United States government is outlined in the Declaration of Independence. All men have the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Capital punishment has been utilized since The United State’s founding. However, the death penalty has been notably criticized since the late eighteenth century. In fact, due to its arbitrariness, the death penalty was ruled unconstitutional—and revoked—in the United States from 1972 to 1976. One thousand four hundred and forty-six people have been executed since the year nineteen seventy-six. However, there are two thousand nine hundred and two people currently on death row. Clearly, there is a disproportion of death sentences and executions. Far more people are sentenced to death in comparison to the number executed. There is an obvious system flaw with capital punishment. Abolitionists argue capital punishment violates the principle of cruel and unusual punishment outlined in the constitution. The effectiveness of execution methods is often low. Leaving inmates to face a slow and arguable painful death. Furthermore, opponents argue the great monetary and sentimental costs of not only the convicted, but of the families and public as well. Families are burdened with colossal monetary and sentimental costs. Taxpayers dollars are also dumped into death penalty cases due to costs incurred through trials. With improving criminal investigation technology, it has also been argued a handful of people sentenced to death were innocent. Capital punishment provides no chance for re-education or proven innocence. Since the reinstatement in 1976, the public view has been shifting. Currently, approval ratings for the death penalty are low. For the slim community of supporters, they argue the death penalty deters crime. This claim is arbitrary being there is no effective method of gauging deterrence. There are endless variables when measuring causation between an individual and crime. There are many negative aspects of the death penalty and the only positive aspect is either it serves justice or deters crime. Being that every judge, jury, and person is different, people should not be capable of judging life and death. Furthermore, crime deterrence is an arbitrary claim and has not been consistently proven. The death penalty violates the United States purpose outlined by the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. In what way, does capital punishment protect the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Capital punishment does not contribute to any of the rights we are guaranteed. There is simply nothing to gain from executing criminals. Not only should it be abolished because of its ineffectiveness, but on its absence to contribute positively to society. The death penalty must be abolished and replaced with a reformed prison system. The reformed system should not only be based on the concepts of punishment, but also re-education. 

This article was written in the year 1990. During this time, executions began to decline significantly indicating a change in capital punishment views. The issue has only continued to build. Pierce and Radelet argue that despite all the perceived benefits of the death penalty, the negative effects outweigh the slight positives. They also argue that the benefits of capital punishment are illusionary—they are not significant benefits. The most effective way to determine whether a public policy is effective or not, per Pierce and Radelet, is to do a cost and benefits analysis. The monetary and social costs are great. Furthermore, the costs and benefits should be weighed by the death penalties effectiveness in deterring crime. Crime deterrence has been linked to an endless number of variables. Another negative aspect of capital punishment includes the racial administration. Death sentences are applied to minorities, specifically African-Americans, far more than other races. All in all, the authors argue that the death penalty is an illusionary solution. Capital punishment places significant moral costs on the criminal justice system as well along with a huge price tag. This source was written in the New York University Review of Law and Social Change. This is a well-recognized source and the authors are well accredited. This source will add to the conversation outlining many arguments supporting abolitionists beliefs towards the death penalty. 

Sarat argues that the death penalty should be abolished for several reasons. He points out many arguments supporting his claim his including moral issues, cost burdens, and false accusations. The death penalty brings high monetary costs. Sarat argues that, above all, the death penalty should be abolished because of the democratic system we live in. Furthermore, a huge sector of the American people disagrees with the death penalty and the government should address this. Capital punishment provides a seemingly simple solution to a very complex problem Sarat argues that this is a common theme within the United States. The book is published by an accredited university. The author also has a large background of political knowledge. This book will add to my conversational research question in a way that other abolitionists sources cannot. Sarat argues based on democracy, while most of my other sources argue based on fundamentals of the death penalty. I am also making this same argumentative approach in my paper. 

In this article, Fagon argues against death penalty supporters based on one argument. This argument includes his opinion that the death penalty does not deter crime whatsoever. He believes that studies and statistical figures addressing the death penalties crime deterrence are false. He states that there is no possible way of accurately measuring the effect capital punishment has on crime rates. There are a magnitude of variables regarding crime and causation. Fagon is a recognized author who is a part of the Columbia Law School. This source will add to my conversation facilitating my argument against the death penalty. The statistical figures will attribute to the credibleness of my paper. 

The American Civil Liberties Union argues to abolish the death penalty in the United States. The article uses the three main points including capital punishment’s monetary, moral, and false accusations issues. The death penalty brings a huge price tag along with it. This includes trial costs primarily along with the actual execution and holding of the convicted. Moral issues include the execution style and its ineffectiveness along with the arbitrariness of how the death penalty is sentenced. The American Civil Liberties Union is a well-recognized credible source. However, the source is biased in regards that it focuses its support on individualistic rights. This source will provide the evidence backing my claim regarding the monetary issues of the death penalty. 

This article discusses the various reasons the death penalty should be abolished per the author. The author bases his argument off the fact that the United States is the only country in the Western Civilized world that still uses capital punishment. The arguments include the huge monetary cost of capital punishment along with the red tape it brings. The source is a recognized credible news source. This source will add to my papers conversation adding specific examples and figures to support the abolitionists view of the death penalty. 

This YouTube video outlines the history of the death penalty in the United States. The video also outlines the various methods of capital punishment. Addressing the vast amount of opposition over the history of the law, it will add as evidence to my claim as an abolitionist of the death penalty. The source is “WatchMojo”. This source posts credible historical informational videos. 

 