Since 1976, the United States has killed 1,364 of its citizens through various methods including lethal injection and electrocution. All of them are victims of capital punishment, or the death sentence. Debate about whether or not states should be allowed to execute its convicted criminals has lasted more than a century and will continue to persist for years to come. Some may say that the death sentence is an integral part of Americas justice system, but others, such as me, remained unconvinced of its necessity. Proponents of the death sentence often insist that the death penalty is important because it deters others from committing crimes, ergo reducing crime rates. This is pure conjecture. There is yet to be research that conclusively supports this point of view. Crimes that are of the degree where the death penalty is considered, i.e. murder and rape, will often occur regardless of the threat of execution. For example, the people who commit these crimes generally lack the most basic level of morality, the avoidance of punishment, in terms of Lawrence Kohlbergs stages of moral development. This is demonstrated by the countless number of criminals who committed crimes even though they knew that there will be some sort of legal consequence to their actions. Therefore, if soon to be criminals are not afraid of punishment, the death penalty does not deter them from committing severe crimes. This in turn, weakens the apparent necessity of the death penalty. Another attribute of the death sentence that negates its importance is that it has and will continue to take the lives of the innocent. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 10 absolutely innocent inmates have been executed and at least 39 executions have been carried out with utter disregard to the serious doubt of guilt in the U.S. alone. The actual numbers are most likely much higher than whats reported due to the lack of interest in studying a case where the defendant is already dead. If our judicial system cannot guarantee that only the truly guilty will be sentenced to execution, as demonstrated by the numbers of wrongfully executed, then we cannot rely on the death sentence to be a just method of punishment. As Voltaire put it, If there really should be one instance in which the law permits a criminal to be put to death who has not committed a capital offense, there will be a thousand instances in which humanity, which is stronger than the law, should spare the life of those whom the law has sentenced to death. Though the previous two explanations supply ample evidence to reject the idea of execution, there is one more reason that I must stress: the state governments are given the power to kill their citizens. This may seem blindingly obvious, but many people dont understand the connotations that are embedded in that statement. Killing someone, as far as we know, brings the absolute end to ones existence. Their already limited amount of time to experience the ups and downs of life becomes curtailed; something that one being should never do to another. Yes, these individuals may have done that themselves, but is eye for an eye justice truly just? Is it morally right to imitate the actions of those which we condemn? Some may say that this is for the judicial branch to decide, and not us, but they cannot be more wrong. Every tax paying U.S. citizen helped make the executions of the 1,364 convicted criminals possible. This includes the number of executed that were exonerated posthumously. Their blood is on our hands. That is, without a doubt absolutely not necessary for the preservation of justice. The evidence against capital punishment is overwhelming: the negative attributes of execution, which includes killing hundreds of our own citizens, some possibly innocent, far outweigh the hollow benefits, which consist purely of being a deterrent of crime. This raises the question, why do the killings continue, who is responsible for the deaths of the innocent, and are our state governments murderers?