Is death a reasonable punishment for capital crimes? How many inmates on death row can each states withstand as more criminals are being held at federal penitentiaries for their crimes? Where would each state maintain their funds continuing the death penalty process? So many questions have spark controversy towards the effect of the states about the death penalty. Some American may support, believing the karma phrase “What goes around, comes around”, but others may view this as having no moral values or benefits. What about the states, can the government in each state maintain moral value in the justice system and finance efficiently? So many questions have spark controversy towards the effect of the states about the death penalty. So the main
…show more content…
In this case, the 1990 election, politicians had open views about the death penalty, how crime fighting programs have the funds cut off, while the high price in death penalty is uncheck. One former candidate formally favor the death penalty, is now against it due to high cost. 2012 Republican Candidate Ron Paul believes the death penalty should be overthrown, since it is based on the convict’s financial status and the cost of incarceration is more affordable. He refers to the financial status the O.J. Simpson …show more content…
The cost of having death penalty across the country is forcing states to pay up to rethink their status about the issue. This results to states abolishing death penalty such as New Jersey did in 2007, realizing the state spend $234 million and not executing one single person. Follow by New Mexico in 2009 abolishing the death penalty, House of Representative, Antonio Maestas, who was also the co-sponsor of repelling the bill stated, “It sounds very callous and shallow to talk about cost, but we spend on people’s money, and have to consider scarce resources.” His perspective were persuasive and sensible rather than idealistic; “I don’t care if they are the most heinous criminals die. They should be. But capital punishment is very expensive for our state, and we have to find the best use of taxpayer dollars and prosecutorial resources. How many murder and violent crime cases could be prosecuted with the resource of one death penalty
In this case, the 1990 election, politicians had open views about the death penalty, how crime fighting programs have the funds cut off, while the high price in death penalty is uncheck. One former candidate formally favor the death penalty, is now against it due to high cost. 2012 Republican Candidate Ron Paul believes the death penalty should be overthrown, since it is based on the convict’s financial status and the cost of incarceration is more affordable. He refers to the financial status the O.J. Simpson …show more content…
The cost of having death penalty across the country is forcing states to pay up to rethink their status about the issue. This results to states abolishing death penalty such as New Jersey did in 2007, realizing the state spend $234 million and not executing one single person. Follow by New Mexico in 2009 abolishing the death penalty, House of Representative, Antonio Maestas, who was also the co-sponsor of repelling the bill stated, “It sounds very callous and shallow to talk about cost, but we spend on people’s money, and have to consider scarce resources.” His perspective were persuasive and sensible rather than idealistic; “I don’t care if they are the most heinous criminals die. They should be. But capital punishment is very expensive for our state, and we have to find the best use of taxpayer dollars and prosecutorial resources. How many murder and violent crime cases could be prosecuted with the resource of one death penalty