ommitting and not committing a crime becomes measured; the deviant weighs the rewards for committing and the proceeding punishments that could occur if caught. If the rewards dashingly surpass the punishment then the crime facilitates. Again, let me reiterate, this type of ideology is the basis of free will and rational decision-making. Now taking a step back and looking at murder objectively and subjectively; keeping unbiased and concentrating on certain environmental variables and the subject in general; the pivotal moments in his/her life that rectified them becoming a killer, society will find that the death penalty does not deter.
             First starting-off by leaving the fallacy behind that most murder is serial and facilitated by a stranger, there will be much more of a generalized idea for why people kill and why the death penalty is not a general deterrent. After understanding the norm for murder, I will backlash among cold-blooded killers--the sadistic callous ones who kill out of lust, sheer excitement, or for power. Additionally, U.S. murder demographics for states that frequently use the death penalty and those that do not will be analyzed, which will conclude again that the death penalty is not a deterrent. Then graduating on to the economic wastes resulting from the death penalty in contrast to life in prison will further entail for the eradication of the death penalty. However, before cutting into the bone, I will start from t
             ...