Two North Carolina brothers were declared innocent Sept. 2 after 31 years of incarceration for the rape and murder of an 11-year-old girl in 1983. DNA testing—which was not used during the initial trial—exonerated one of the brothers from death row and the other from a life sentence, according to the Center for Death Penalty Litigation, an organization which provides legal representation for prisoners on death row in North Carolina.

The advent of DNA testing post conviction in cases like that of the two North Carolina brothers has rekindled debate on whether the U.S. should abolish the death penalty which began in 1992 with the founding of the Innocence Project, a nonprofit organization that assists those on death row that claim innocence with DNA testing. The botched execution of an Oklahoma prisoner in April after the drug was incorrectly injected into his thigh—the prisoner endured almost an hour of pain before death—has spurred discussion regarding the morality of executions.

Although it may be human nature to seek retribution for atrocious acts such as murder and rape, the possibility of wrongfully killing an innocent person is too great of a risk, and it is time for the U.S. to abolish the death penalty.

Since 1993, 18 prisoners on death row have been exonerated through the increased use of DNA testing and evidence, according to the Innocence Project.

Capital punishment has long been controversial. In 1972, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was unconstitutional, citing it as a violation of the 8th Amendment’s protection against “cruel and unusual punishment” and was applied arbitrarily. However, the Supreme Court amended its decision in 1976 ruling that the penalty was constitutional only if it was imposed based on objective criteria, if appellate review was mandatory and if mitigating circumstances were considered. The death penalty is applicable in 32 states, not including Illinois, which abolished the penalty in March 2011.

The controversy surrounding capital punishment extends worldwide. According to Amnesty International, two-thirds of the world’s countries have abolished the death penalty. The abolition of the death penalty in most developed countries should encourage the U.S. to evaluate its own policy.

Many in favor of the death penalty argue it can deter crime, but an April 18, 2012, report from the National Research Council of the National Academics found the death penalty is no deterrent to crime after analyzing more than 30 years of crime statistics.

Aside from failing to deter crime, the death penalty is also reliant on a judicial system that is inherently flawed. The government condemning someone to death requires absolute trust in the system’s ability to convict criminals beyond a reasonable doubt. However, intense interrogation by police can often lead to wrongful convictions, as was the case for the two brothers. According to the Center for Wrongful Convictions, 84 percent of false confessions happened after six hours of continuous interrogation. The commonality of lengthy interrogations resulting in false convictions was seen in 2003 when an Illinois law, sponsored by then-Sen. Barack Obama, was passed requiring interrogations in homicide investigations to be recorded and later reviewed in an effort to prevent false convictions.

Sentencing someone to death is a serious act, and there is no room for error. Discovering that someone was innocent after they have been executed is beyond unspeakable. After a life has been wrongfully taken, there is no way to amend it. The only way to ensure such a mistake cannot happen again is for the nation to change its views on capital punishment.

No one can deny the horrific cruelty of murder, but the death penalty is an approach that U.S. government and society should set aside. There are too many faults in the justice system, and granting authority to the government to end its citizens’ lives is a power no democratic society should practice.