A death penalty is, in theory, reserved for only the worst of crimes and is the ultimate punishment. Yet, we cannot ignore that the "eye for an eye" mentality will never solve anything. Yes, we want to make sure there is accountability for crime and an effective deterrent in place; however, the death penalty has a message of: "You killed one of us, so we'll kill you"." What type of message does this send to the citizens? That the best way to find closure is through their death.death? And not only that, but, there are several documented cases where DNA testing showed that innocent people were put to death by the government. There have been variousVarious cases that have ended with the innocent dying and we simply cannot take it back. Death is not something that easy to takecan be taken back and forgiveor is easily forgiven. And the fact that our government has wrongly killed, not one, but many, people, makes them seem more barbaric. People might state that the death penalty is for the safety of the people, but is it right for the government to have the power to proclaim whether or not someone should live or die because of a majority opinion. Most people don't realize that carrying out one death sentence costs 2-5 times more than keeping that same criminal in prison for the rest of his life. How can this be? It has to do with the endless appeals, additional required procedures, and legal wrangling that drag the process out. It's not unusual for a prisoner to be on death row for 15-20 years. Judges, attorneys, court reporters, clerks, and court facilities all require a substantial investment by the taxpayers. Do we have the resources to waste?