Is it Worth the Moolah?

Many people would assume most peoples problems with the death penalty, morality...right? Many have a big issue over the cost of the death penalty. The editors acknowledge the issue about the price of the punishment because they want to convince each state of another different reason the death penalty should be banned. The New York Times recently released an article that argues that the cost of the lethal injection is a huge issue, that not only affects the government or the person being put to death, but also the community as a whole.

The New York Times asserts many facts about different states and their costs for completing the punishment of the death penalty. New York Times believes that the money should be spent elsewhere. They complain that the mass amounts of money are spent on the execution itself, high security and maintenance, and the long tedious appeals process which may take about fifteen to twenty years.

Personally, I believe that the cost of the execution is quite insane. The New York Times insists, "Perhaps the most extreme example is California, whose death row costs taxpayers $114 million a year beyond the cost of imprisoning convicts for life." This means the citizens of the state are paying for crimes committed by an individual. Yes, the community would be paying in taxes for the guilty persons life imprisonment, but in relation to the death sentence. the price of imprisonment just cannot compare.

Not does the New York Times claim only is the death penalty morally wrong, but they hope that the states will pay more attention to an economic view of the issue. It is argued in the article that, " If lawmakers cannot find the moral courage to abolish the death penalty, perhaps the economic case will persuade them to follow the lead of New Mexico." Morality may be argued differently between diverse groups of people, but money is money. Nobody wants to spend money that is not needed and is one-hundred percent preventable.

I agree with the economic standpoint that the death penalty is very costly, and that the taxpayers should not suffer do to an unrelated person proven guilty of a particular murder. Morality though, is seen differently by every person of a society so it is hard to say what is right or wrong, but cost is not really debatable. Millions of dollars spent by the public is expensive, no one wants higher taxes than what they already have to pay. I do not think it is right it is the duty of the taxpayers to pay for a crime that they did not take part in. Who's responsibility do you think it should be to pay the millions of dollars that the death penalty costs?


Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/28/opinion/28mon3.html

Effective or Not?

The Article, “Does Death Penalty Save Lives? A New Debate “, published by Adam Liptak examines the relationship between the death penalty and the crime rates. It is focused towards the public trying to reason whether or not the death penalty is justifiable or not. The article mentions multiple opinions throughout the article, so it is hard to identify the author’s true opinion and where he stands on the issue. He mentions however that some research has shown that the more executions that have taken place, the more the crime rate has decreased. He also reveals that many experts also say that there are far too little executions for data to prove that theory.

Liptak then discusses the expense of following through with the death penalty. Justin Wolfers, an economist, states that money should not be spent on the lethal injection, and rather the money should be focused towards other causes, such as the prevention of crime, which he suggests would have a greater impact. Liptak identifies his point that there is not sufficient data to determine whether the death penalty is effective or not.

This article was written in 2006, so there has been more research done, but with such a small amount of executions performed, the article states about 1 in 300 homicides result in the death penalty, so it is still hard to tell whether the death penalty prevents other crimes due to a lack of evidence.

I believe that the death penalty probably does not significantly change the crime rate because the crazy people out there do not question whether or not to kill someone based off the fact that they may get the death penalty. I also agree with the fact that the death penalty is quite expensive, but also maybe necessary in certain cases.  If people continue to kill, the price of the death penalty is less than multiple lives that may have been prevented. Some also may suggest life imprisonment, but taxpayers also pay for the guilty to live their lives under a federal or state roof.

Liptak is writing to question the public on whether or not the death penalty is efficient or not and should people consider different options. Should the United States reconsider the death penalty due to its effectiveness or ineffectiveness?

Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/us/18deter.html

Why the Death Penalty?

My blog topic is concerned with the issues of the Death Penalty. I chose this topic because it is so controversial and most people have an opinion or something to say about it. I am interested in this topic because it relates to my major and I am particularly interested with crimes and the punishments that fit a certain crime. There are many different sides to the death penalty argument, and many people take different things into account. For example, how the person was brought up might affect their view on the death penalty, or even who the suspect is and crimes they have committed beforehand. Some say it is inhumane, and we have laws against murder, but others think it is only fair after the crimes they have committed and the damage they have done. Im leaving this question to the audience, "Do you think the Death Penalty is acceptable in our society?"

About Me

My name is Taylor Bottock and I am currently 19 years old. I am from Falls Church, Virginia, a suburb outside of Washington D.C. I attended George Mason High School, which is particularly small compared to other schools in my area, only about 150 students per class. Mason was where I played lacrosse and volleyball. During my senior year, I achieved my goals of making the lacrosse 1st all district team and 2nd  all region team, after only playing in one region game. I am a freshman at James Madison University, after originally planning on going to the University of Pittsburgh. I had my mind set on majoring in chemistry, but after taking a whole 1st semester of science, I decided that definitely was not for me. I am now majoring in Justice Studies and hopefully that is how it will stay. I am part of a family of four; I have an older sister who attends UVA law school, which is something I am considering in my near future. I also have a dog, Choco, who may as well be included in my family, but unfortunately he prefers my dad over me. I love to go out with my friends,shop, or occasionally have a movie night in, which for me is just as enjoyable.