Should the death penalty be banned as a form of punishment?

The prisoner's family must suffer from seeing their loved one put to death by the state. One victim's innocent family is obviously forced to suffer from a capital murder, but by enforcing a death sentence, you force another family to suffer. Why double the suffering when we do not have to?

The possibility exists that innocent men and women may be put to death. Death makes a miscarriage of justice irrevocable. There are several documented cases where DNA testing showed that innocent people were put to death by the government. A big problem is to distinguish between murdering someone and acting in self-defence. How can one proof that the death was not planned?

However, DNA testing can now effectively eliminate uncertainty as to a person's guilt or innocence. One of the biggest arguments against the death penalty is the possibility of error. Sure, we can never completely eliminate all uncertainty, but nowadays, it is about as close as you can get. DNA testing is over 99 percent effective.

The death penalty gives closure to the victim's families who have suffered so much. Some family members of crime victims may take years or decades to recover from the shock and loss of a loved one. Some may never recover. One of the things that helps hasten this recovery is to achieve some kind of closure. Life in prison just means the criminal is still around to haunt the victim. A death sentence brings finality to a horrible chapter in the lives of these family members.

With the death penalty justice is better served. The most fundamental principle of justice is that the punishment should fit the crime. When someone plans and brutally murders another person, does not it make sense that the punishment for the perpetrator also be death?

A killer should think twice if he commits a certain crime. If he does not,

judges will not think twice to do justice to the victim.