Allen debates firstly on the utilitarian arguments and thus possible benefits of the death penalty. Accordingly to Allen capital punishment is a deterrent and an understandable reaction of those who have been affected by the homicides. However, the significance of deterrence is unclear. Studies result only minimum support for deterrence as a consequence of executions, or what Allen in other words is trying to say: death penalty is to discourage or, scare if you will, the people from committing a murder (the death penalty in the U.S. today in practise, only applies for murder) (2), and does not have any effect. “Capital punishment remains a freakishly rare punishment” says Allen. This is a reaction to the following, if capital punishment has indeed barely sufficient deterrence or caution effects like what was just argued, it can just as well be an argument for its increased use instead of its decreased use. People do not feel alarmed enough for the consequences to prevent them from committing a murder. Clearly, it is difficult to understand the arguments from deterrence and finding a way to interpreted them sufficiently.…
Ron Fridell states, "The basic principles of deterrence are that punishments are necessary to deter crime and encourage law abiding behavior. Punishment must also fit the crime with more serious crimes requiring more serious punishments. (61) I agree with the author because capital punishment serves as a device to discourage certain forms of behavior by making the consequences of these actions unpleasant. Capital punishment is acceptable under those terms and it is necessity to the betterment of society. Micheal Kronwetter said, "No other punishment deters men so effectively as the punishment of death."(19) As an example, murder peaked in 1990 with 2,200 deaths, when New York did not have the death penalty. In 1997, when capital punishment was reinstated the murders for the year totaled 767. Deterrence obviously worked in relation to these crimes. There seems to be a direct relationship between deterrence and the effects of capital…
In our country’s justice system the death penalty is good for many things, such as, serving as a deterrent for violent crimes all over the nation. We as humans have the ability to decide for ourselves whether an idea is good or bad. Often times to do this we look at the actions of others to earthier strengthen our confidence in our idea or to deter the idea that we have. This is the same concept that the death penalty brings to our society. the death penalty according to Richard Worsnop a writer for the CQ Researcher, “…is traditionally justifiyed in society for two reasons, retribution and detturance(Williams). The Latter of the two in retrospect is the most important. In our justice system the main crimes that are punishable by the death penalty are felony murder or murder in the first degree(Mitchell). Felony murder is defined as, “a killing treated as a murder because, though…
Chan, J., & Oxley, D. (2004, October). The deterrent effect of capital punishment: A Review of Reasearch Evidence. Contemporary issues in Crime and Justice, pp. 1-15.…
Abstract: The question of whether the death penalty is a more effective deterrent than long-term imprisonment has been debated for decades or longer by scholars, policy makers, and the general public. In this article we report results from a survey of the world’s leading criminologists that asked their expert opinions on whether the empirical research supports the contention that the…
The issue of whether decision making by criminals is a rational process is a heated topic of discussion when one asserts that crime is the role of choice. Before the classical school of criminology, crime was thought to be the product of the paranormal occurrence of demons, witches, ghouls, and other creatures. The time prior to the classical school of criminology, called the preclassical era, is divided in two parts. Before the time of state intervention into private matters, each individual dealt with violations of their rights. This was a problem because of the continuous cycle of violence being perpetuated. Soon the State (and even the Church) took on the task of dispensing law and order to the masses of the Middle Ages. This led to a period called the Holy Inquisition which lasted from the twelfth century to the eighteenth century. During the Holy Inquisition, punishment that was harsh and capricious was the norm. Also, there was no protection against bogus allegations, meaning, the burden of proof was on the accused to prove his/her innocence.…
Historical theories of punishment were based on the concept that applying fearful consequences to criminals would discourage any potential offenders. During the late 1700’s, a criminologist by the name of Cesar Beccaria argued the fact that the death penalty served no purpose as a form of punishment, let alone as a deterrence to criminals. He advocated to reform the criminal justice system through penology, concerning specifically with punishment and deterrence (Beccaria, 2009). In the following essay, Beccaria’s theory of punishment will be thoroughly…
Sorensen, J., & Pilgrim, R. L. (2006). Deterrence: Does It Prevent Others from Committing Murder? In Lethal Injection: Capital Punishment In Texas during the Modern Era (pp. 20-76). Austin: University of Texas Press.…
The gains associated with capital punishment are the affect it can have on effectively deterring criminals from not only murderer, but any serious crime (Cameron 1989). It is used as an intimidation factor for which people weigh the cost and benefits of their actions, and in a case where the cost is their life, the probability of them committing a crime will decrease (Shepherd 2004). The significant relationship it shares with the homicide rate has been found that 150 fewer homicides take place in reaction to one execution happening to a convicted murderer (Cooter and Ulen 2012). Looking at this relationship directly from an economic perspective, capital punishment can be seen as a commodity; an increase in it leads to an increase in consumer welfare as it decreases the chance of another victim being murdered (Cameron 1993). The effect that deterrence has on society is seen as a public good as well because of the positive, widespread affect it has on a larger number of consumers by increases their safety and security. By increasing the amount of resources the government puts towards conviction and punishment for criminal activities, it will allow for a reduction in harm (Cooter and Ulen 2012) and allow the demand for protection and a safer environment to be met. Capital punishment is the strongest alternative of punishment to create the largest deterrent…
“In the early 1970, the top argument in favor of the death penalty was general deterrence” (Radelet & Borg, 2000, page 2). The authors argue that the death penalty does not prevent others from committing the same offense. They describe how deterrence studies have failed to support the hypothesis that the death penalty is more effective at preventing criminal homicides than along imprisonment.…
Before I proceed, I think it best to delve further into to the basics of criminal Deterrence, and what it is. Deterrence is based on the concept that if the consequence of committing a crime outweighs the benefits of the crime, then the perpetrator will be deterred from committing said crime. This is all in the idea that as humans we all know the difference between right and wrong and that with criminal behavior, a penalty is bound to follow, when an individual acts, they’re doing so out of free will and they know what they’re doing, be it right or wrong. Ironically the deterrence model is flawed to an extent with it’s thinking; criminals are rational, a murderer may be a murderer for the same reasons I choose to work as a salesman for the time being: because the profession makes him better off than anything else available to them. The model fails to realise that murderers, or anyone who commits crime for that matter, are constantly outweighing the benefits and repercussions of any actions they may commit, not thinking of what may be a rational and sound decision to others.…
People also believe that the death penalty is a deterrent to criminals, the most powerful weapon to prevent the crime occurred. But the fact is the death penalty compared with other kinds of punishment, the death penalty does not deter crime has a special function. Offenders can be divided into two categories: Impulsive type and plan type. For impulsive, they are in the non-rational state at the time of crime, reckless commission of a crime, the death penalty cannot afford deterrent for them. For the plan type, there are too many elements need priorities than death, such as Benefits available on crime, criminal attitude towards his life and so on. Thus, the deterrent effect of the death penalty not prominent than other kinds of punishment. As some homicide, injury, rape, crimes were mostly due to some conflicts or situations stimulation, so that the loss of reason, impulsive, and at the moment committed a crime. In this case, the perpetrators are often impossible to accurately discretionary legal consequences of his crime may cause. For these people, the death penalty deterrence can be said too late to play. Furthermore, most of these people will regret afterward, in fact, sentenced these people to death runs counter to repentance, even those who escaped will continue to stimulate criminal psychology. According to studies, many murderers have that idea after killed first person: "kill one person is dead, kill more people is dead too, so it's ok to kill more.” So the death penalty maybe is an indirect stimulation of the…
Law enforcement teaches offenders that crime is punished. However, deterrence is the exclusion of commit a criminal act for factors as such as fear of sanctions or punishment. The history of deterrence begins by the end of the 1700s in the work of Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham, but the interest in deterrence and rational choice theory developed by the mid-1960s. Specific deterrence view that if experienced punishment is severe enough, convicted offenders will be deterred from repeating their criminal activity. However, this theory states that people seek pleasure and avoid pain ( Weinrath and Gartrell, 2001). Both authors discuss that the length of punishment affects the offender to commit the crime again. In other words, specific deterrence…
As a deterrent to crime, the death penalty has little effect because the chances of a murder being sentenced to death are slim to none. However the death penalty deters some people. As the Royal Commission (1948–1953) observed in its lengthy and thoughtful report, “We can number its failures, but we cannot number its successes.”23 We can never know how many people who would have otherwise committed murder stopped them only because society threatened death as punishment. The deterrence question, really, is not whether the death penalty deters—sometimes it surely does—but whether, on balance, it deters more effectively than life without parole. (D’elia).…
One of the leading topics of debate concerning the issue of capital punishment is whether capital punishment existing deters criminals from committing serious and violent crimes such as homicides and sexual assault. This paper explores the findings and thought processes of some of the leading criminologists in the World and their interpretation of statistical data of homicide incidence rates. As I am exploring similar research in my paper, their findings can help me develop my own opinion on whether capital punishment is an effective and powerful enough deterrent to negate violent criminal activity or whether it would be prudent to avoid capital punishment altogether and follow an incarceration model such as that employed within Canada.…