IndexThe Watts Tragedy: A Case for Capital Punishment?Economic Considerations on Capital PunishmentMoral and Ethical ImplicationsDeterrence: Myth or Reality?ConclusionIn the Wake of Morality-Shocking Heinous Crimes foundation of society, the debate on the effectiveness and morality of capital punishment acquires renewed fervor. The tragic case of Chris Watts, which destroyed his family, serves as a reminder of the "monsters among us" and pushes this discourse into public and academic arenas, including IELTS discussions. This essay delves into the arguments surrounding capital punishment, exploring its deterrent effect, economic implications and ethical considerations. By weaving the narrative of capital punishment into the context of the IELTS debate, we aim to discover whether the ultimate punishment can actually serve justice or whether it simply perpetuates a cycle of violence. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The Watts Tragedy: A Case for Capital Punishment? Chris Watts' unfathomable act of killing his pregnant wife and two daughters casts a long shadow over the capital punishment debate. His life sentence raises the question: Would capital punishment have been more appropriate? Supporters argue that such irreversible crimes require an equally definitive response. The logic goes beyond pay; it is also seen as a potential deterrent, a means of economizing the penal system, and a way of cleansing society of its most malign elements. George W. Bush's statement that "capital punishment... is a deterrent against future violence and will save more innocent lives" summarizes the argument for the death penalty as a necessary evil in the face of unfathomable crimes. Economic Considerations on Capital PunishmentThe economic argument for capital punishment suggests that it is cheaper than life imprisonment. With an average daily cost of $85 per inmate, the financial burden of long-term incarceration on taxpayers is substantial. Supporters argue that the death penalty, despite the high upfront costs of trials and appeals, ultimately saves money by avoiding the expense of decades of imprisonment. This perspective is reinforced by claims that the death penalty could streamline the justice system and relieve pressure on prison resources and capacity. Moral and Ethical Implications Despite the pragmatic arguments in favor of capital punishment, its moral and ethical dimensions are deeply controversial. The biblical reference to "Whoever sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed" is often cited in support of the death penalty. However, this position is counterbalanced by concerns about the sanctity of life, the potential for miscarriage of justice, and the morality of state-sanctioned killing. The debate extends to the New Testament, where the emphasis on forgiveness and redemption challenges the eye for an eye mentality. The complexity of these moral arguments reflects the broader social struggle to reconcile justice with humanity. Deterrence: myth or reality? The deterrent effect of capital punishment remains one of the most polarizing aspects of the debate. Although some studies, such as Isaac Ehrlich's 1973 study, suggest that executions can prevent future crimes, this notion is contested. Critics argue that the threat of death is unlikely to deter those acting out of passion, mental illness or under the influence of substances. Furthermore, the lengthy appeals process and relatively rare implementation of the death penalty in many jurisdictions undermine its deterrent potential. The question remains: the penalty,.