I think the article misses the point of the main argument for the death penalty. The main argument is not whether it acts as a deterrent, or if it harms/benefit

I think the article misses the point of the main argument for the death penalty. The main argument is not whether it acts as a deterrent, or if it harms/benefits a group over another. Maybe these are the arguments thrown in public discussions. But the central argument for death penalty is whether it is _just_ to punish a person by death, if they commit a certain crime, or if it is _just_ to imprison them. It is not a question of what benefits society, but whether it is a form of justice. Those who advocate for generally believe that punishment is not primitively a method for fixing behavior, though that might or might not occur. Instead, it is a form of intentionally inflecting damage/pain for justice[1]. But the article is right on that in practice, there are important and significant difficulties in carrying out the death penalty. But those who advocate for death penalty would say that it is unjust to not punish people by death when they commit certain crimes. [1] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justice-retributive/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justice-retributive/