The year is 1987. Two businessmen were found murdered in their hotel room. The suspect? A man who was their business partner and had recently accused them of embezzling nearly half a million dollars from his companies. The man is tried and found guilty, and he is given the most severe punishment there is: the death penalty.

Twenty-eight years later, he is still awaiting his execution, even though new facts in his case have come up. It is discovered that the two businessmen were laundering money with the Escobar Drug Cartel in Columbia, who framed the man for the double murder. Judges would not accept this sudden claim, the testimony was not considered valid, so this man was still awaiting his death. This crime wasn’t committed and prosecuted in a country like Russia or North Korea or China, but America. The “suspect” in this case later had his sentence reduced to life in prison; however, he may have his chance at freedom now that the case is going to be revisited.

This eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth mentality makes our justice and correctional system incredibly flawed. The use of capital punishment is a double standard. You as a citizen are not allowed to commit murder unless you are the government and you see fit. Capital punishment is wrong, no matter your religious or moral compass. It is used as a tactic to scare criminals, yet it is extremely ineffective.

The year is 2013, April to be specific. Mass hysteria has ensued after two bombs went off at the Boston Marathon. Nobody knows if it was a mere accident or a possible act of terror. Hundreds have been injured, many have lost limbs, seven have lost their lives. Anyone over the age of seven more than likely will remember the events that took place at the finish line of the Boston Marathon back in 2013. It was called a terrorist attack. Two brothers were found responsible for the attack, which was called a terror attack, and one of them was killed. The trial for the surviving brother started this year, nearly two years after the attack. It is obvious that he is guilty; there is no doubt in anyone’s mind that he will be found guilty. The debate now is whether or not he will receive the death penalty.

The years is 2014. An Oklahoma man has just beheaded his co-worker in a gruesome attack. There are speculations that this man will receive the death penalty for his horrid crime committed against another person.

The year is 2016. A young woman, Sierra Joughin from Ohio, was abducted and killed in what is suspected to be a gruesome fashion by a man suspected to be a serial killer and serial abductor. This man attempted to abduct a woman years ago but did not spend much time behind bars because he did not succeed, but he is a suspected serial killer. People are saying he deserves to die.

Some may say, "What is wrong with this? These people took the lives of others; they deserve to have their lives ripped from them as well." The answer is not that simple.

The death penalty is considered when trying those that have committed acts of terror, possibly the worst kinds of attacks. The truth of the matter is that if these men die for their actions, not only will the United States government be committing the very crime that they say is so incredibly heinous, but these men will die as martyrs and be celebrated in their extremist cultures. Not only that, but the average inmate spends over 10 years on death row and can attempt to repeal their sentencing, causing a new trial to take place, further re-victimizing not only any living survivors but the families of those who were killed.

When the Boston Marathon Bomber was awaiting sentencing, the parents of a 7-year-old boy killed in the bombing pleaded with the jury to not give him the death penalty, as they would have to revisit this traumatic incident every time he wanted to appeal his sentence. The family of Sierra Joughin would have to revisit the kidnapping of their loved one every few years as the monster who killed her appealed his sentence.

Many also see this as “the easy way out” for these monsters who commit absolutely atrocious crimes. Personally, I believe that if you are sick-minded enough to commit a crime and have the death penalty considered against you, you should spend the rest of your miserable life in a jail cell, thinking every single day about the choices you made and the people you hurt. The Boston Marathon Bomber, the man who beheaded his co-worker in 2014, the man who abducted and killed Sierra Joughin and who knows who else, they don’t deserve to die. They deserve to spend the rest of their lives thinking about their victims. They deserve sleepless nights plagued by the things they did to their victims; they deserve to get just a fraction of the hurt that they have caused to not only their victims but the families of those victims as well.

The Boston Marathon Bomber and the man who beheaded his co-worker, they were both jihadists. If they were to die, they would be celebrated by their culture because then they would be martyrs for their cause. Do we want that? Do we want to give these terrorists another martyr to aspire to be like? Do we want to give them what they want? No, we don’t. By killing extremists like these, we are doing the exact opposite of what we want to do, which is scaring people into following the law, which is the worst thing you could do.

The biggest reason that I disagree with the death penalty is because of my beliefs. As a Christian, I believe that all life is precious and we as humans don’t have the authority to “play God” and take someone else’s life whenever we please. Although these criminals have committed crimes, or allegedly perpetrated in some situations, we don’t have the authority or the right to take their life. If murder is considered so heinous a crime then why do we punish criminals by victimizing them in the same way they victimized someone else?

In the end, it all boils down to this: No human has the right to "play God,” the right to take someone else’s life, no matter what the circumstances.