The death penalty has been applied since ancient times in different civilizations. Capital punishment was always used based on two arguments: as a form of punishment for the criminal and, at the same time, as a way of preventing other crimes.
You have to ask yourself if the crime, whatever it is, deserves to lose your life, and if this, in fact, diminishes to some extent the incidence of similar infractions. It seems to try to correct the violence with more violence.
On the one hand, there are studies that indicate that imprisoning a prisoner sentenced to death is much more expensive than trying to rehabilitate him and reintegrate him into civil life if he meets a series of psychiatric requirements that make him eligible. On the other hand, many cases have shown that the majority of inmates whose fate is the death penalty did not have access to legal advice that would provide them with the advantages that a person with financial means would have.
Thus, many of these convicts, in the United States, are people of color, Latinos and immigrants who had to depend on the legal aid of the state, which can not provide the attention nor the time that one of these cases requires.
More than 50 countries in 2019 still use the death penalty as a punishment, and still others have not used it in the last ten years.
We must also talk about the humanity of the measure. Regardless of the crime, inciting death only leaves us trapped in a cycle of unstoppable violence. And the blood they spill is now in the hands of the state which, sponsored by taxpayers' taxes, sheds more blood and creates in its citizens a policy of violence that we will not have how to explain to the new generations.
The global statistics on the application of the death penalty compared with its possible impact on the reduction of crime has not shown convincing results that can prove with certainty that this sanction hinders the commission of crimes.
