Death Penalty: Smirnov And Capital Punishment

A man by the name of Smirnov met a woman from Chicago named Jitka Vesel. They dated for a few weeks, and then Vesel broke Smirnov’s heart. Smirnov moved back to Canada in heartbreak and eventually plotted to kill her. He tracked Jitka down by GPS, waited outside her work, and ambushed her with gunfire. He surrendered to policemen, telling them he headed back to Chicago to murder Vesel since Illinois had recently abolished capital punishments. At trial Smirnov pleaded guilty, and was given a life sentence. He was expecting this due to his statement to the prosecutors: “Illinois doesn’t have the death penalty, so I’ll spend the rest of my life in prison” (Jacoby). Would Jitka Vesel still be alive today if Smirnov would have had to face the death
It began as far back as the Ancient Laws of China, where the death penalty had been established as punishments for crimes (Reggio). It began for the reason to punish crimes, and today it still works for the same cause. By punishing criminals with death, it weakens the need for them to commit crimes that are applicable to the death penalty. Over many decades of research the death penalty has proven to deter murders shown through many studies however, “One particularly good study, based on data from all 50 states from 1978 to 1997 by Federal Communications Commission economist Paul Zimmerman, demonstrated that each state execution deters an average of 14 murders annually” (Muhlhausen). Not only does the death penalty give a factor of fear to criminals, but it stops them from committing crimes such as murder. While the death penalty has proven to be an effective method of deterring murders, there is still a chance that an innocent person could be killed if suspected guilty. Even though there is a possibility of that, over the years they have used DNA samples to exonerate people on the death row. For example, “2015 set a record for exonerations in the United States—149 that we know of so far, in 29 states, the District of Columbia, federal courts and Guam. This record continues a trend: the rate of exonerations has been increasing rapidly for several years. The 149
An Urban Institute study of Maryland has produced, “Cases resulting in a death sentence estimated that each cost taxpayers an average of $3 million in lifetime costs--$1.9 million more than no-death-notice cases” (Muhlhausen). It may cost more money to pay for the death penalty; however, on the other hand, it has many benefits that outweigh the cost. These expenses protect innocents, hold society’s most vicious criminals accountable, and are legitimate functions of federal and state governments. For example the death penalty holds many criminals accountable for their actions such as, “Lonnie Franklin Jr., 63, a former city trash collector and garage attendant for Los Angeles police, was convicted of 10 counts of first-degree murder last month for crimes dating back more than 30 years” (The Associated Press). Despite the fact that the murderer is getting killed, the death penalty helps saves future victim's lives. The executions are not expensive, but the years of appeals that precede it are, “Defendants facing death tend to have more, better and costlier lawyers. Death-row inmates are more expensive to incarcerate, too: they usually have their own cells, with meals brought to them and multiple guards present for every visit” (“The Slow Death…”). A way to fix this problem is by speeding up executions; not only would that help the deterrent