Neely 1

Hailey Neely
Colleen Green
English 3/4
November 17, 2016
Rehabilitate The Death Penalty
Innocent people die every day, but it is not always an unfortunate accident. Often times it
is a result of the death penalty. The death penalty has been in use for many years. It is the act of
executing a person for a crime they have been found guilty of committing and although there are
rules in place to prevent innocent convictions, innocent people still end up on death row, simply
because of human imperfection. The fact that innocent people die, unnecessarily, as a result of a
flawed justice system process is reason enough that the death penalty should be abolished in all
states. All life is precious and the risk that people are dying without warrant is unacceptable.
Instead, the efforts previously being used towards the death penalty, should now be used towards
rehabilitation programs in prisons.
The death penalty has gone on for too long. The first recognized death penalty laws date
back to the eighteenth century B.C. (Part). Throughout the years, various methods of execution
has been performed around the world. This includes, beheading, boiling in oil, burying alive and
many other barbaric actions. (Part). The most common method in the United States is lethal
injection, with thirty three states using it (California being one of them) (States). Although most
states use the death penalty, there are nineteen states that do not. Ideally there will be 50 states
that do not.

Neely 2

Experts say that the death penalty is detrimental to society because of money loss and the
loss of innocent lives (Holloway, CNN). CNN Legal Analyst, Philip Holloway, who is a
former law enforcement officer, former prosecutor, criminal lawyer, and continuing real-world
"student" of criminology, has seen, first hand, the flaws of the death penalty. Death penalty
litigation makes no financial sense, he stated in his article, Time to question sanity of death
penalty. He also goes on to explain how, as opposed to death penalty, prosecutions seeking life
without parole would cost less taxpayer dollars, as stated in his example, in Colorado, where the
Holmes jury now has to spend the next several weeks hearing evidence, the state will shell out
approximately $3.5 million, as opposed to an average of $150,000 if the state had not sought the
death penalty. In this case the money that was used for the death penalty could have been used
to help rehabilitate the criminal. Not only is the death penalty losing money, it is also losing
innocent lives.
Another point Philip Holloway makes in his article is, Despite safeguards, innocent
people do wind up on death row. As unfortunate as this is innocent people will never stop being
wrongly convicted and once this inevitable fate happens, the possibility of undeserved death
cannot be available. There have been 154 verified cases of death row exonerations since 1973
is another fact that Holloway stated in his article. That number is extremely large. This highlights
the fact that, since that amount of people were wrongfully convicted and exonerated before their
death date, there must be a some people that were wrongfully convicted and not exonerated in
time for their death date. In other words, there have been innocent people murdered by the death
penalty and more cases like these will continue to occur if it is not abolished.

Neely 3

Instead of the death penalty, rehabilitation programs should be put in place because it
would be a better use of money and it would improve society as a whole. This would consist of
prisons providing any necessary therapy that each inmate needs to be able to get out of prison
and become a functioning member of society. Rather than violently punishing each prisoner,
which leads them to become violent if not more (Gillian), prisoners should be taught the proper
way to be and how to achieve that.
Another reason rehabilitation is a good solution is because of prison overpopulation. As
stated by Philip Holloway, the death penalty, as opposed to life without parole, is very
expensive. However, if people who would be on death row now just get life without parole, the
already huge problem of prison over population would be at an all time high. Instead, the
expenses previously used towards the death penalty should be put to a more productive use
which is, rehabilitation in prisons. This would not only be a more humane solution, but it would
also keep more people out of prison. In James Gilligan's article titled, Punishment Fails.
Rehabilitation Works, he states Two-thirds of prisoners reoffend within three years of leaving
prison, often with a more serious and violent offense (Gilligan). This means that potentially
two-thirds of people being released from prison will be back in prison within three years, on top
of the, already, large rate of people going to prison the first time. Rehabilitation would drastically
lessen the amount of prisoners, re offenders, and crime in general due to the fact that their are
now less criminals because they have been rehabilitated.
People opposed to the idea of rehabilitation centers in prisons might say that people who
have committed a crime should be punished for it and if that crime is bad enough, they should be
executed. This is a selfish way of thinking because it does not benefit society long term. In the

Neely 4

interest of keeping more crime off the streets, correcting the behavior of the people who would
make those crimes is a most efficient way of doing so as people have been known to learn by
example. Another reason people might oppose the idea of rehabilitation centers is the fact that it
will be quite expensive. While this is true, it would be replacing the death penalty which already
is costing a lot of money. It would also decrease the amount of people going and returning to
prison thus costing taxpayers less in the long run.
The death penalty may seem like it only affects certain people. One might think, theres
no way I would ever be put in a situation where death row is something I, personally, should be
afraid of. This statement may be true at the current moment, but if killing people for a grand
crime is acceptable now, than killing people for a smaller crime, such as speeding, may be in our
future. Murdering people for any reason cannot be causal. Some reasons might be different for
different people because a good reason to kill someone is subjective. Murder should not be
tolerated under any circumstances. Along the same lines if prison over population keeps being a
problem, proper crime control might be compromised as well as taxpayer dollars, due to the
necessary added attention to prisons.This is why something else is needed and that something
else is rehabilitation programs in all prisons.
As unfortunate as it is that people commit such terrible crimes, it will happen and the
death penalty is not the answer. The death penalty is a barbaric system that has been undergoing
for too long. Not only is it inhumane, ineffective, and unjust, it is also a net loss when it comes to
money. Instead, behavior correction efforts should be put in place. This would make society
better as a whole as it would lessen crime, lower prison population, and help people in need.

Neely 5

With this information people can spread the word about how flawed the death penalty is and
changes will come; one state at a time.

Works Cited
Gilligan, James. "Punishment Fails. Rehabilitation Works. - NYTimes.com."Punishment
Fails. Rehabilitation Works. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Dec. 2016.
Holloway, Philip. "Death Penalty: Why America Needs a Rethink." CNN. Cable News Network,
n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2016.
"Part I: History of the Death Penalty." Part I: History of the Death Penalty | Death Penalty
Information Center. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2016.
"States With and Without the Death Penalty." States With and Without the Death Penalty | Death
Penalty Information Center. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2016.