Early Wednesday morning, Kelly Gissendaner became the first woman to be executed in Georgia in 70 years. Her children's heartfelt pleas to save her life echoed throughout the nation, as well as the story of her prison transformation from the cold-blooded conspirator of her husband's murderer, to a minister with a degree in theology and a carefully reconstructed relationship with her children.

Her story captured the nation. It seems rare to actually see a prison reform someone in the way that it is intended to. It's no secret that the rehabilitation of inmates in America is an infrequent occurrence. It is especially rare to see this transformation in an inmate who's spent the past 20 years watching the sand flow from her hourglass.

For clarification purposes, I would like to emphasize that it is clear on all accounts that Kelly Gissendaner was guilty in the part she played in her husband’s murder. She had three children and she robbed them of a father. She robbed a man of his life, she robbed his parents of a son, and she robbed his siblings of a brother.

That piece is clear, horrible, and inexcusable.

However, there are many inherent issues to the death penalty that go beyond a person’s guilt, beyond a person’s reformation, and beyond forgiveness. This story came into the media spotlight because of those things, but now I think it’s important to talk about the penalty itself.

Economically, the death penalty is impractical. The average difference between a non-death penalty case and a death penalty case varies by state, but death penalty cases can be up to $2 million more on average, according to the death penalty information center. Non-death penalty murder cases often result in a life sentence in prison.

Ethically, I find it very difficult to assert that the death penalty is anything less than wrong. If you define ethics as determining that which facilitates or frustrates human dignity, a life cut short always frustrates. As Gissendaner demonstrated, a life in prison is still a life.

It seems incredibly barbaric that this practice is still alive and well in our society. According to Forbes magazine, at least 4 percent of all people who receive the death penalty are innocent.

This staggering statistic has been brought to light this week as well, in the wake of Oklahoman Richard Glossip maintaining his absolute innocence over the murder of his boss, Barry Van Treese. He was accused of offering his coworker, Justin Sneed, money for carrying out the murder. Sneed is serving a life in prison, without parole.

These stories are important ones to address because they bring a bigger issue to light. They put faces and names to the bigger picture.

Through these cases and stories, empirical data, and the basics of ethics and humanity, it seems pretty obvious that a life for a life is no way to run a system.