The Death Penalty And The Rise Rate Of The Violent Crime

In “How the Death Penalty Saves Lives”, written and published by David B. Mulhausen on September 29, 2014, Mulhausen speaks of the reasons why the death penalty is a proper way to bring murderers to justice. He believes that “some crimes are so heinous and inherently wrong that they demand strict penalties” (Mulhausen). Not only does he believe that the death penalty is useful to set criminals to justice, but he also believes that the enforcement of the death penalty deters crime rates.

In capital punishment, vast amounts of money are wasted before the prisoner is assigned the death punishment. This is a result from the legal case that has to be processed prior to any decision made, which involves confirming if the suspect is indeed guilty. Without a doubt, this would require several months, documents, and lawyers, all requiring tedious effort and time. Due to this, millions of dollars are used in matters that aren’t necessary, whereas the costs of life imprisonment are significantly lower. As well, life imprisonment will positively benefit the social aspect of the community. Since this form of punishment uses less money, millions of dollars would be saved and chosen to go towards new schools, hospitals, technology, and other services in low-income communities. As a result, more opportunities will open to the less fortunate people, lowering the overall poverty and crime rate, as well as improving the education levels of the area. By choosing life imprisonment as the main form of ultimate punishment, the state of the nation will continue to steadily increase as money is saved, and investments are fulfilling its duty of steering the country towards

Those who believe that deterrence justifies the execution of certain offenders bear the burden of proving that the death penalty is a deterrent. The overwhelming conclusion from years of deterrence studies is that the death penalty is, at best, no more of a deterrent than a sentence of life in prison. The Ehrlich studies – which took

The idea of capital punishment deterring crime is difficult to determine; some could rationalize that the death penalty should in theory stop potential murders from committing crimes. However, this rationalization has never been concretely proven. The research into capital punishment’s effect on deterrence is immense; however, the majority of research on this issue has differential findings. Although some research suggests conclusively that capital punishment deters crime, others found that it fails to do this. Understanding deterrence, the death penalty, and the results of

The death sentence in America has brought financial tolls unto American society and the government. According to Source B, “the death penalty is clearly more expensive than a system handling similar cases with lesser punishment.” Using death as a punishment for wrongful crimes has put America in a tight financial condition the death penalty itself costs more than a combination of smaller punishments. This shows that although incarceration and various types of

Another issue related to the subject involves whether or not capital punishment actually deters criminals from committing crimes. Most people think that the death penalties primary function is to deter others in the future from committing similar crimes. There is evidence that at times capital punishment does deter. However, there are those or cite evidence or opinion that the capital punishment does not achieve its desired effect. The majority of this paper will focus on whether capital punishment actually deters crime.

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.”

State executions influence the potential and active criminals by the simple “you kill, we put you to death”. A conclusion drawn from that idea could be that punishment by death would be a prevention of crime. Regrettably the information does not get along with the proposal of deterrence being effective. The truth of the matter is that the death penalty does not affect potential criminals physiologically; the effect brought about by brutalization does not deter criminal activities. An economic writer and Professor Isaac

Deterrence has been the backbone of the United States justice system for a long time now, yet does deterrence truly work? When people plan, or commit violent crimes are they considering the immediate consequences of their actions? Offenders do not typically weigh the penalties they may receive after committing a serious crime. Keeping this in mind, increasing the severe ness of punishment, ultimately, will neither decrease or increase the amount of crimes committed in the United States. Death penalty does play a larger role in the deterrence of criminal acts. The death penalty has been a hot topic regarding whether it should be a legal punishment or not. Many arguments arise from this topic including: is it moral of the state to take a life? Or what act of crime is deserving of the death penalty? And how much of a role does religion play into the decision of the death penalty? Deterrence plays a major role in the discussion of death penalty. No one wishes death upon themselves nor would be satisfied with death by the justice system. The death penalty ultimately does deter major crimes in the sense that a

The first argument that I shall contend with is that capital punishment does not deter crime. Opponents of capital punishment say the death penalty is not necessary. Other countries that no longer have the death penalty have not experienced an increase in the number of murders. The idea is that the death penalty does not deter crime. Countries such as Sweden, Netherlands, Denmark, Switzerland, and Belgium have not carried out executions since the early part of the century, yet these countries have not experienced a rise in crimr rates (Block, 1983). However, deterrence is not the question when you are looking at the retributive value of capital punishment. In short, deterrence can only work if the threat of punishment is combined with the conviction that the forbidden acts are not only illegal and therefore punishable but immoral. Without the conviction of morality, the easily frightened will not break the law, but the fearless will break the law, the irrational will break the law, and all others will break the law.

Last but not least, from a sociologic perspective, capital punishment does not work as intended, to deter crime rate, rather, it might brutalize individuals, at the same time does nothing good to the victim’s family other than brutal vengeance. The origin of death penalty is served as a vehicle to put a warning for those potential future criminals that such kind of behavior will lead to death. However, so far, no clear evidence can be seen that capital punishment, as a mechanism of deterrent, actually cut down the local crime rate. Ironically, a reversal trend was found by Death Penalty Information Center (2010) in the USA that the death penalty leads to an increase in local murder rate. To die might be too easy for the mindless murderers. Also, for the relatives or friends of criminals put into death through capital punishment, they are more likely to be

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.

Finally, American criminals should get the death penalty in order to stop the wasting of tax payers' money. The real-world fact is that many treatment programs a re simply not effective(Walters 36). Professionals will tell you prisons don't stop crime, yet we go on spending billions of dollars in order to lock up more and more people. Tax payers continue to pour money into prison construction and operations in a way that competes with funding for education and other quality-of-life programs. Hundreds of billions of dollars have poured from taxpayers' checking accounts into penal institutions and the businesses that serve them(National Criminal Justice Commission 37). The number of Americans in prison has Quadrupled in the past twenty years(Campaign for an Effective Crime Policy 46). Even with all of this spending- tripling prison populations- the level of crime has essentially remained unchanged over the past 20

In contrast, the question of deterrence can be answered objectively using common sense and statistics. By analyzing different arguments for and against the death penalty, such as the "fear of death" myth, the cost of the death penalty, and the racial and economic bias of the death penalty, it can be shown that the death penalty is not an effective deterrent of crime.