Opponents of capital punishment have argued that the death penalty is unfair and discriminatory. but it's ridiculous to suggest that cold-blooded murderers should not have to pay for their crimes. how is that fair to the victims or their families?

This seems like an extremely biased "class." This is a very controversial topic that I can see both sides to, but for sakes of this question, will only explain the counter argument. How can you advocate killing people to spread a message not to kill people. Does it not seem ironic and oxymoronic to say "We don't support killing people, and we are going to show this by killing people who do it!" Also, some people believe the death penalty is too easy. Some victims' families would like the person to spend the rest of their life slowly dying in prison. Another bug argument is how humane is it? Obviously the electric chair is going to hurt, and even with lethal injection, there have been errors resulting in people having seizures and other body attacks while strapped to a table. These methods are not full proof and can be very inhumane.

River arrow on this map is pointing