Similarities Between Hoekstra And Cheng

It is irrational to think that the death penalty – a remote threat at best – will avert murders committed in drug turf wars or by street-level dealers” (Bedau). This shows that the death penalty is not stopping murders from occurring. The introduction to the death penalty conducted a survey were top criminologists stated that the death penalty does not deter homicide rates (Introduction). “For 2009, the average Murder Rate of Death Penalty States was 4.9 [Murder rates by the 100,000], while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 2.8” (Introduction).

“A recent study by Professor Michael Radelet and Traci Lacock of the University of Colorado found that 88% of the nation’s leading criminologists do not believe the death penalty is an effective deterrent to crime. The study, Do Executions Lower Homicide Rates? The Views of Leading Criminologists, published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Crimonology, concluded, “There is overwhelming consensus among America’s top criminologists that the empirical research conducted on the deterrence question fails to support the threat or use of the death penalty.” A previous study in 1996 had come to similar conclusions.”

For instance the significant rise in concealed Carry permits in the state in the last few years. More Floridians have been walking around armed so it would only make sense that “From 2005 until 2012, the number of concealed weapons permits in Florida skyrocketed, from 347,350 to 979,000” (Lantigua). Georgia State researchers Chandler McClellan and Erdal Tekin suggest that “One potential explanation offered for a relationship between Stand Your Ground laws and homicides is that an increased number of individuals may carry guns in public and be willing to use them as a result of these laws" (Lantigua). Most of the increase in justifiable homicides was due to police shootings which rose from 22 in 2004 to 65 in 2011, “Stand Your Ground” situations where civilians shot civilians, went from “eight in 2004 to 47 in 2011” (Lantigua). One would expect for the police shootings to rise because of the fact more citizens are carrying weapons. Police officers are going to be a lot more cautious on every traffic stop and on every call because there is more risk of being shot or injured in some way. The rise in civilian shootings from 2004 to 2011 is the statistic that has everyone on edge.

With the crime rate commonly believed to be detrimental to the safety of society, one might assume to inflict stricter gun control laws. But, just how effective are these laws in reducing the amount of crime committed? As examined by Kleck and Patterson (2006), the rationale for gun control must first include the assumption that the availability of guns entails a significantly positive correlation on violence rates. But, Kates and Mauser (2006) studied the aggregate relationship between gun control and lower crime rate and found no evidence of this correlation.

) Moreover, the pattern of this kind of murderer, the killer, is almost by definition a person who takes his chances like the soldier of fortune he thinks he is. (37) Most killers do not engage in anything like a cost-benefit analysis. They are impulsive, and they kill impulsively. If capital punishment does deter criminals, it can do so only indirectly. Potential murderers must have some standard of right and wrong. They must acknowledge morals issues. They must be without mental illness and they know and have the capacity to think about what they are doing. This conception of general deterrence seems deeply flawed because it rests upon a doubtful conception of how this murderous population internalizes social norms. Although the perpetrator

This paper examines concealed handgun laws in the United States with the purpose of measuring the effects of the laws on crime rates. There is a lot of previously done research on the subject of concealed handgun laws with conflicting results and opinions. Many researchers are in agreement that more research on the subject needs to be done. In this study, states that have implemented the concealed handgun law are compared to crime rates before it was in effect as well as other states that have implemented the law. The results of this project show evidence that when citizens are allowed to carry concealed weapons __________ lower/raise crime rates, in particular, violent crime rates.

In 1993, there were more than 18,000 firearm homicides in America. That number has been decreasing for the past two decades. In 2011, the reported number of firearm homicides was a little more than 11,000. In another part of the world, Germany was reported to have less than 200 firearm homicides, France less than 50. It is also estimated that there are around 270 million guns in America. This paper examines the possibility that if the American government put into place gun regulation laws, and made penalties more harsh for gun related crimes, the national murder rates would go down.

The issue of jurisdictional conflict between the civil courts and the Syariah courts has been standing unresolved for so many years. Notwithstanding the amendment made to Article 121(1A) of the Federal Constitution in 1988, the battle between the two courts remains unsettled. The root cause of this issue is the existence of a grey area between Article 121 (1) and Article 121(1A) of the Federal Constitution after the 1988 amendment.

At certain points in history, gun sales to civilians have been prohibited by law. In 1976, Washington D.C. implemented a gun ban that potentially worsened the city’s homicide rate. According to the Metropolitan Police Department, annual homicides rose from 188 in 1976 to 364 in 1988 and continued increasing to 454 in 1993. The gun ban was struck down by the Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller and since, homicides have steadily declined to 88 annual murders in 2012. This statistic shows that depriving the right to bear arms from law abiding citizens is ineffective in decreasing the number of homicides as criminals will find a way to obtain a gun even with a gun ban in place. The law-abiding citizens will be left vulnerable as the criminals will have defenseless victims to attack. The United States has attempted to put gun bans into place in the past. However, these regulations have been repetitively ineffective. Because of the ineffectiveness of gun bans and the overall counter-result of an increase in homicides, it would be in best interest, for the safety of Americans, to not implement an increase on Federal gun control

Several studies within the American society have proven that some of the gun laws currently being enforced can reduce the crimes, but not necessarily stop them nor keep them from happening at a high rate. Gun laws

Homicide rates were up at their highest in the Unites States and California prior to 1994. Around 1994, after the enactment of this law California and the United States showed a major decline in homicide. (Zimring, p.153)

However, no individual has ever been able to present any credible evidence that supports the theory of deterrence. Decades of research across the country has failed to produce signs of a higher murder rate in states that have abolished the death penalty. The theory of deterrence assumes that a murderer is examining the costs and benefits of the anticipated criminal act and taking a moment to think rationally. In the United States, the death penalty is only handed down for about one out of every one hundred homicides. A murderer has a greater chance of being killed by the planned victim or in a confrontation with the police, and therefor has no reason to fear the death penalty if there is only a one in a hundred chance they will actually receive it (Jackson, Jackson, and Shapiro 33). Moreover, most homicides are unplanned, impulsive acts and to imply that a murderer is thinking calm and cooly outweighing their options in such an emotionally charged environment is simply idiotic.

A leading detractor from this theory, Daniel Nagin, believes that statistics of past deterrence and the death penalty should be overthrown. With Nagin’s high credential in being a Harvard scholar in Criminology overlooks many studies goes in to say that those several researchers who focus on past statistics should be ignored. Nagin claims, “The evidence does not exist to back them up” (10). Although, he may be correct in some extend, I can agree when he explains his answers. Nagin believes that due to being inconclusive on whether or not the death penalty is deterrent, it still increases crime and makes people skeptical about it still. No one really knows whether to agree or disagree with the capital punishment. Even so with Nagin’s opinion

Wanting to evaluate whether TSLs deter crime, The Justice Policy Institute (1999) collected data from California counties to measure the rates of sentencing. Researchers found that the highest sentencing counties apply TSLs at rates three to twelve times higher than the lowest sentencing counties. However, they also discovered the highest sentencing rates did not have a significant impact on crime. In fact, some counties experienced a higher rate in

Defenders of the death penalty often claim that the execution of criminals will teach others not to do bad, initially decreasing crime rates. This hasty form of generalization statistically proves to be wrong. “When it comes to criminals, Texas has the toughest punishments along with a strict court system. The state of Texas spent four hundred and seventy million dollars in 2001 just for punishing convicts. Despite all that money and stern punishment, the crime rate is still twenty four percent higher than the national average, according to 2003 data” (Gonzales). This supports the fact that tough punishment doesn’t necessarily help crime. Ironically, the harshest state in the U.S continues to house the maximum number of criminal acts. The death penalty, a harsh form of punishment, clearly doesn’t lower crime rate.