Is the death penalty cheaper than life in prison?

Answer 1

At first glance it seems to be logical that it is much more cost effecient to execute a prisoner versus life imprisonment. But the facts tell a different story. With every death penalty handed down by jury and judge, there comes with it certain built-in appeals that must by law be exhausted before an execution can take place. The cost of these appeals are horrifically expensive for the taxpayers. At one time it was estimated to cost at least $11 million to bring a prisoner to the death chamber. It is probably more by now. There has been legislation proposed to cut down on some of this process and in turn reducing the cost of the lengthy appeals treadmill but as yet I don't know if any of it has been passed into law. And every state is different and the laws can vary greatly from one state to another.

Answer 2

It would be a spiritually impoverished society that chooses to implement a death penalty in preference to jail terms, merely on the basis of cost. But the death penalty is not necessarily cheaper, even just in monetary terms.

Nations that retain the death penalty generally provide every possible avenue for appeal before allowing the death penalty to be carried out. This means that the convicted person may in any case spend several years in jail while awaiting the outcome of all appeals, the costs of which are born by the state. And even then, forensic experts have established the innocence of several executed persons, after it was too late.

Answer 3

The death penalty costs much more annually than life in prison. The state of California, in one year, uses over $250 million on death penalty, and just $11.5 million on life in prison.

Answer 4

If you mean what costs more for the government, life in prison. A man in prison has to be provided shelter and food, whereas a dead man obviously does not.