Clarence Ray Allen was the poster boy for capital punishment. He was one of a few rare individuals who actually committed another capital crime while incarcerated.

Unlike "Tookie" Williams, the parole board had not advocated clemency. Nor could Allen show a long history of reform and atonement that Williams demonstrated.

Yet even in this case, how has Allen's death served to bring back to life the victims of his crimes? How has his death served as a deterrent towards others considering capital crimes?

Numerous studies have shown either no difference in states where the death penalty is outlawed and a capital sentence is life in prison with no possibility of parole is substituted OR a SLIGHTLY HIGHER incidence of capital crimes in states which HAVE a death penalty.

Most countries in the world have outlawed the death penalty as "barbaric." The USA is in a very small class of nations which still use execution: China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and the Palestinian Authority.

Only 1% of capital crime convictions result in execution. It is not fast, cheap, or fair.

In fact, it costs the state 4 TIMES as much money to execute a prisoner than to pay for them to spend a lifetime in prison.

And there is always the problem of executing an innocent person.

Finally, can we truly say we, as a society, are vehemently against the taking of another's life when we utilize the death penalty as a matter of course? Why are we sending such a double-message to our young people?