By Lisa Conley
Round Table broadcast editor-in-chief
and Emma Trapp
Marketing Director

The walls are splattered with blood and the carpet is soaked scarlet. A cold, dead body lies on the floor, so mangled it is barley recognizable. The murderer replays the vicious attack in his twisted mind: her life in his hands, the screaming, the scratching, the futile pleading…he loved every second of it and craves the power once again. However, he cannot evade his ultimate fate and is quickly apprehended by police forces. He is tried and convicted of murder and rape. He is discharged after 10 years due to good behavior, despite receiving a 25-year sentence. He smiles with excitement as he is released onto the streets, already envisioning his next kill.

There have been approximately 16,000 homicides each year in the United States over the past decade, yet only 1,234 inmates have been subjected to the death penalty since 1977. This goes to show that the system has become too lenient with inmates in regard to their sentences.

Some states, such asMichigan and West Virginia, have completely abolished the death penalty, clearly overlooking the resulting implication: taxpayers’ hard-earned money is paying for the food, clothes, education and jobs of murderers and rapists in prison.

It costs $3,794,837.69 per year to support inmates in jail, an average of $41,865.63 per inmate. If all of the criminals on death row were executed on time, it would save the state approximately $1.88 million per year, money that could be spent on more beneficial things, such as providing schools with new books.

Not only should the death penalty be reintroduced to the states in which it was repealed, but it should be implemented more often.

Of course, not everyone agrees.

Some people believe that the death penalty allows criminals to take the easy way out. If inmates were locked up for the rest of their lives, then they would be forced to reflect on their crimes and would presumably become laden with the burden of their guilt, a punishment far worse than the death penalty. Yet prison is not always as terrible people think it is.

The inmates who behave receive special rewards such as a television in their room, arts and crafts, getting their hair stylized, gym access, going outside and an overall free living consisting of food, drinks and snacks.

The purpose of being incarcerated is the punishment of not having access to these amenities. If criminals were to have access to all of those perks, why not just place them under house arrest?

Inmates also have the opportunity to obtain a free college education. It hardly seems fair that murderers and rapists should get educated for free while hard-working, law-abiding citizens do not.

The idea that these inmates will have time to “think” and “reflect” on their actions is unrealistic; how could they have time to do that when they are busy socializing with other inmates? The level of interaction allowed at prisons and jails has gone too far.

Another concern about the death penalty is the question of who should receive it. It’s simple, really; all murderers should receive the death penalty. Rapists who are found guilty of having committed one or more rape (repeat offenders) should also receive it.

Perhaps one of the biggest controversies surrounding the death penalty involves the possibility that a person is wrongly convicted, but with today’s DNA technology the chances of that occurring are extremely slim. If there was enough evidence to convict a person, then that person should have to pay the punishment.

The people who commit these vile crimes took the lives of someone’s daughter or mother or father…someone who was very important to someone else. Who are they to take an innocent life?

Which raises the question: Who is the court to decide that the murderer’s life should be taken away? Once again, the answer is not complicated; if someone takes a life, they should have to pay with their own.

The person who was murdered did not know what was happening; it obviously wasn’t a choice. The murderer knew exactly what he or she was doing and should have to suffer the consequences.

Some say that murder, including “state murder,” is never humane, but the way in which the murderer receives the death penalty is usually far more humane than the way in which the victim’s life was taken.

The death penalty used to be carried out through an electric chair, a firing squad or gas chambers, but now inmates fall asleep as they receive a painless shot (lethal injection) that slowly stops the heart’s beating.

They are luckier than their victims. They are not getting cut up into multiple pieces, stuffed into a trash bag and tossed into the ocean.

The only people who should be exempt from the death penalty are those with previously known mental disorders that are the direct cause of the murder. Instead of the death penalty, those people should be admitted to a mental health facility for permanent care.

Imagine a future in which people don’t have to worry about checking a database to see if a rapist lives nearby and a child can walk to school without fearing their criminal neighbor.

That’s the future many dream of and it’s one that can only be achieved if the death penalty is not only reintroduced to the states in which it was repealed, but implemented more often.