Abolitionist Arguments Against The Death Penalty

The death penalty is a very controversial subject in today’s culture and being a criminal justice major; this topic has a lot of interest to me. If I had to classify myself in a group that dealt with capital punishment, I would consider myself a retentionist. I am all for punishing the guilty and giving murders the punishment they deserve. Not only in my eyes, but the eyes of all retentionists, we believe that the main reason we should punish the offender is because they morally deserve it. I truly believe that the death penalty is morally permissible.
I believe that the two biggest arguments that abolitionists have going for them is the idea that the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment and that we should respect their human dignity more. I can see where they could have an argument there but at the same time that is their belief. We all have a different stance on this subject, it’s just what you think is the better outcome in the end.
Abolitionists believe that the death penalty is considered cruel and unusual punishment due to all of the things that have happened in previous executions. They believe that innocent people who are wrongly convicted are executed, executions …show more content…
Richard Dieter explains, “The death penalty is much more expensive than it’s closest alternative – life imprisonment with no parole. Capital trials are longer and more expensive at every step than other murder trials. Pre-trial motions, expert eye witness investigations, jury selection, and the necessity for two trials – one on guilt and one on sentencing – make capital cases extremely costly, even before the appeals process begins. Guilty pleas are almost unheard of when the punishment is death. In addition, many of these trials result in life sentences rather than the death penalty, so the state pays the cost of life imprisonment on top of the expensive trial.” (Dieter,