For me, the death penalty is too contradictory and risky to be used. I mean, how can you support the death penalty when you realise just how incredibly dumb the reasoning behind it is. "To prove killing is wrong, we shall kill this man!" That is contradictory and a complete fallacy. Also, the death penaly is no more a deterrent than life imprisonment. How do we gauge which is the least desirable, one can never experience both. Not to mention money. Contrary to popular belief, it costs more on average to put someone on death row than to imprison them for life.

Prison just seems better. To some, it may bring a smile to their face knowing that a criminal is suffering for his entire life rather than for 5 minutes or so. But it is plain to see just how stupid the death penalty is.

I think that death penalty should be definetly replaced by life imprisonment. Of course I clearly understand that these both are not humane measures ( living the rest of life in the cell is also pretty horrible thing), but the second one seems for me better option, at least it does not take human life. Maybe it sounds absolutely banally, but it is pure true that no one has the right to deprive someone else of life, eveh if that person commit crime. For me It is madness and innormal to use violence againtst violence and it is absolutely contrary to all moral qualities that we try to preach today.We live in XXI century and we are civilised and advanced enough, why should we use such barbarous

way of punishment?

Another argument against death penalty is that actually it does not guarantee the reduction of crime .The execution of the perpetrators only creates the illusion that the society was"cleared" and that the lives of its members became more safety. Execution does not contribute to struggle with anti-social causes of crimes. The main factors causing crime are poverty, ignorance, inequality, mental disorders and etc. So how death penalty can affect these causes? On the contrary, the atmosphere of cruelty and bloodthirsty ruthlessness in society, which is legitimized by the state which use the death penalty only creates new opportunities and favorable conditions for an even more terrible and violent crime. For example, a person who commits an crime which is punished by death penalty and pursued by the justice may consider that he is in a situation where it is "nothing to lose," as a result he commits new crimes. Moreover it is believed that a person may knowingly commit a crime punishable by the death penalty, when he lost the will to live and is ready to commit suicide, but is afraid to do it himself. So, as you see death penalty does not have deterrent effect on criminals, and virtually useless in the fight against crimes...

One of the most popular argument for the death penalty is high financial costs of keeping perpetrators in prison for life. It is believed that the offender should be executed, because society, in the case of life imprisonment, will be forced to spend money on its content. Actually this point is wrong and the opposite has been already proven. In fact the cost of the death penalty 2-5 times more than of life imprisonment. Carrying out one death sentence costs so much because of endless appeals, additional required procedures, legal wrangling and etc. Judges, attorneys, court reporters, clerks and court facilities all require money...

Generally,I think that this issue should be assessed only with the moral positions, and economic feasibility, in principle, should not be taken into account when deciding someone's life or death. So this argument does not make sense...