The Deterrent Effect

Frank Newport of Gallup News Service did a study on the public’s opinion of the death penalty and 69 percent replied with “yes” when asked if they were in favor the death penalty (Newport, 2007). His report also states that every year since 2001 when he polled the question “Is the death penalty morally acceptable?” the majority of the public has responded with “yes” (Newport, 2007). According to Newport’s study, most men (76%), women (62%), republicans (81%), democrats (60%), whites (73%) and non-whites (55%) are “in favor of the death penalty for a person convicted of murder” (Newport, 2007). This study supports the fact that the majority of society agrees that the death penalty is a just and fair way to punish convicted murderers.

     One argument from death penalty supporters is that the death penalty acts as a deterrent to prevent other people from committing murders. It is the belief that people will think out the consequences of their actions before murdering, and consider the

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 penalty does not help reduce crime. They compare and see the different crime rates between the states. In America's Death Penalty: Just Another Form Of Violence states in the article that “a recent study commissioned by The New York Times examined FBI data and found the death-penalty states average murder rates consistently exceeded those of non-death-penalty states” (Bessler 14). States that do not use capital punishment have lower crime rates than the states that use it. The death penalty does not stop crime but actually influences people to. When the crime rate is high, it also means that it is not as safe to be living there. In the book, Death Row and Capital Punishment, it states that “the places that use the death penalty the least seem to be the safest for police officers” (Kerrigan 45). It is saying that it is safer for officers which also means that it is safer for people too since there will be less crime. There are more cops to help protect people. The thing is that some people are deliberately being targeted and giving harsher punishments than to

The use of the death penalty has brought peace of mind to our citizens. Though through the mid nineteen sixties until the early nineteen eighties only about six death penalties actually took effect. When the number of executions dropped, the murder rate rose from 5.6 per 100,000 people to 10.2 which is almost double the murder rate. A society cannot live in fear but needs to live in reassurance and protection. As of nineteen ninety-nine, the murder rate dropped dramatically to 5.7 because the execution rate increased to 47 executions. Pearce, Matt. "Counterpoint: Defending The Death Penalty." Points Of View: Death Penalty (2014): 6. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 23 Sept. 2014. This demonstrates the deterrent effect capital punishment has on society. The result is deterrence shows if one kills then one will be punished for their actions and crime.

“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.”

All of the research that I have done suggests that the death penalty is not a major source of deterrence for criminals to commit severe crimes such as homicide. In a 2009 survey of America’s top criminologists, published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology and written by Professor Michael Radelet, eighty-eight percent of the expert criminologists stated that they do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent for criminals to commit homicide. Respondents to this survey were asked to base their answers on research, rather

Prisons for example, are a dominant sense of making the country feel safer because the criminals are being locked up. Also, the death penalty can be a form of deterrence towards other criminals because they are able to see what is happening to other criminals that commit the same types of crimes. Whether or not this does deter criminals from committing crimes is another story.

The death penalty does not deter criminals from committing crime. Most criminals who commit crimes do not have intentions of being caught and believe that they are invincible from the repercussions of their actions. Because of this, the death penalty really does not deter criminals from committing a crime. In fact, the death penalty could be considered an “easy way out” because the criminal does not have to spend several months, years, or even the rest of his or her life behind bars with little contact with the outside world. The criminal can just die and no longer have to suffer with knowing what he or she did, how it has affected others, and how it will continue to affect his or her life. Also, many criminals end up committing suicide in prison because they do not want to have to spend every day locked in a jail cell for extended periods of time.

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.

The majority of research I found states that capital punishment and life imprisonment has the same deterrent effect. There is not enough conclusive evidence that proves people are deterred from committing capital crimes through the use of the death penalty. Capital punishment does not act as a

Studies of the deterrent effect of the death penalty have been conducted for                                               several years, with varying results. Most studies have failed to produce evidence that the death penalty deterred murders more effectively then the threat of imprisonment. The reason for this is that few people are executed and so the death penalty is not a satisfactory deterrent. If capital punishment were carried out

The deterrence argument states that, "although executing the murderer neither prevents the death of the victim nor restores their life, instating the death penalty effectively prevents the deaths of other victims" (Nathanson, 1987). On the surface, this seems like a convincing argument, because of course, if the murderer is dead, then he/she will not kill again. The question is, though, does the death penalty prevent the potential killer from ever killing in the first place? Is it more effective than other forms of punishment? Supporters of the death penalty argue that the death penalty ensures that the murderer will not strike again. But doesn't life in prison without parole do the same?

An issue that has continually created tension in today's society is whether the death penalty serves as a justified and valid form of punishment. Whenever the word "death penalty" comes up, extremists from both sides start yelling out their arguments. One side says deterrence, the other side says there's a potential of executing an innocent man; one says justice, retribution, and punishment; the other side says execution is murder. Crime is an evident part of society, and everyone is aware that something must be done about it. Most people know the threat of crime to their lives, but the question lies in the methods and action in which it should be dealt with. In several parts of