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…
The article “Death Penalty” by Robert Kiener gives the public a summary of what the people think about the death penalty and why is should or should not be allowed. This article starts by saying how the Boston Marathon bomber started up the debate about the death penalty being or not being allowed again and how less of the people who used to support the death penalty now no longer support it any more. Then, Robert writes that Nebraska is thinking about stopping the death penalty and how it would be interesting to see the result this will have on the people. Afterword’s Robert talks about how much the death penalty cost and the money that could be saved if stopped, there is also the fact of innocent people being accused of crimes they have not commented in the past. Next, it states how death sentences have been going down anyways and put on hold because of…
Crime is a major problem in our world today. Some people in our country live in fear that they will be the next victim of a crime; they could be robbed, raped, or even murdered. There are so many theories on how to stop crime. One of the theories is the use of the death penalty as a deterrent. There are a lot of issues that surround that idea that make the use of the death penalty just as bad as the accused committing murder. It is very contradictive, inconsistent, and unethical. Although some people believe that the death penalty deters crime, there are many arguments against it. For example, the costs are extremely high, racism is involved, and there are innocent people on death row to list a few.…
The Death Penalty. This name alone would scare anyone and it is undoubtable the worst penalty a person could receive. It has been used for centuries, but today many argue that this punishment is not moral, while there are others that argue that if you are cruel enough to take a life, you deserve to get your life taken away, a life for a life. Louis Pojman and Jeffrey Reiman have debated this issue very closely, coming up with two opposite opinions on capital punishment. I will argue that even though I can see why Pojman thinks the way he does, he just doesn’t have enough evidence to back up his thesis when comparing it to Reiman’s. I will suggest an adjusted version of Pojman’s argument on deterrence for capital punishment by looking…
Some pros to the death penalty are that it protects innocent people and that the death penalty serves as a deterrent. Sentencing convicted murderers with the death penalty we are protecting inmates, guards, and people outside the prison. If we do not sentence convicted murderers with the death penalty and instead sentence them with life we are giving them the opportunity to murder while in prison. A statistic shows that by executing convicted murderers we are saving from three to eighteen innocent lives. The death penalty serves as a deterrent because without the death penalty there would be a lot more murderers. This is so because a lot of people do not commit murder in fear of the death penalty and those who have committed murder would…
(1) It prevents the individual from committing more crimes while they are incarcerated. B. [Attack the reasoning] Second, although capital punishment could be seen as a deterrent, there’s no data to support the claim. 1. From a scholarly essay written by John Lamperti, a professor of mathematics at Dartmouth university, the author does a statistical analysis on whether or not capital punishment deters murder.…
Some may say that the death penalty is helpful to society because it intimidates criminals into committing less crimes, particularly murders, when in reality, studies like one done by Benjamin S. Tyree of the University of Richmond show that there is no correlation between the use of the death penalty and lower murder rates, and if anything, states that do not use the death penalty, have lower murder rates than those that do (Deter, Tyree). If that is the case, then it is obvious that the death penalty does not benefit our country.…
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…
The death penalty has many benefits. One is that it can help stop evil people from hurting others again in the future. A study in Texas, a state where re-arrests are common, showed that only 20% of prisoners served all their time (Dieter). If the death penalty had played a bigger role in Texas prisons, fewer prisoners would have been released early, and re-arrests would become less common. It has been shown that for every inmate put to death 3 to 18 murders are prevented (Muhlhausen).…
3. Furthermore, both proponents and opponents argue over crucial aspects about Capital Punishment like deterrence, morality and retribution, incapacitation and rehabilitation, the cost, and the potential risk of executing an innocent person. Capital Punishment, according to proponents, deters potential murderers because they will fear receiving the death penalty themselves. According to Jennifer C. Honeyman and James R. Ogloff, both are lawyers and James Ogloff has worked as a psychologist for thirty years, in Capital punishment: arguments for life and death, “deterrence is used to suggest that executing murderers will decrease the homicide rate,” or “general deterrence” (3). By executing the murderer, the death penalty ensures he or she cannot…
But does murder solve murders? According to multiple scientific studies, they don’t. In fact, in states without the death penalty, the crime rate is lower than the states that do. North Carolina’s crime rates dropped almost immediately after executions stopped. In a 2008 survey, criminologists and police chiefs around the country ranked the use of the death penalty at the bottom of a list of effective crime fighting tools. They said that more law enforcement resources were the most needed tool for reducing violent…
Bibliography: Radelet, Michael L, and Traci L Lacock. "Do Executions Lower Homicide Rates?: The Views of Leading Criminologists." Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology. 09.02 (2009): 489-508. Print.…
In an article written by Marc Hyden he states, ?Submitting the power to kill U.S. Citizens to the State is unwise considering [the] history of error and malfeasance? (1). Hyden is saying that to allow the State to determine whether someone should die or not is not a smart idea. People make mistakes; it?s what they do. But when it comes down to making a mistake about sending an innocent person to death, that is a mistake that you cannot undo or make right. In this article by Hyden, he talks about the innocent being killed by allowing the state to determine whether or not someone is put on death row, how some are being tortured due to botched executions, and how it does not deter crime as much as people like to think. To Hyden, the death penalty should be abolished because of the State having too much authority than they should, because it kills innocent people, and because there are many botched executions. To others, these things could all be satisfying to them. They support the death penalty and they want to see people die for what they did. Hyden says, ?There?s no greater authority than the power to take life, and our government currently reserves the authority to kill the citizens it?s supposed to serve? (2). This statement is heavy. The government has an extremely powerful thing over people?s heads. Although there are horrendous crimes, does that give the government the…
Capital punishment imposes justification for punishment with retribution in the form of a life for a life. Capital punishment is a very controversial issue because of its effects on society. Many believe that the death penalty serves as a deterrent to murderer; however, according to Nygard K. (1996) "… states with active capital punishment have a stable, higher rate of homicide than those without capital punishment. Nygard K. (1996) asserts that… Research revealed that homicide rates actually escalate after a criminal has been executed. Givens M. (1992) points out a noteworthy disadvantage to retribution… Capital punishment is irreversible and a person that has been wrongfully judged and put to death can not be brought back to…
The death penalty can in fact deter heinous crimes from being committed when it is lawful in a state. Social scientists have stated that the act of general deterrence, which is when the punishment deters potential criminals from committing crimes, keeps criminals from going through with crimes. However, it is more shown that premeditated crimes are usually the ones stopped by general deterrence, not crimes under passion. Heinous crimes have been reduced highly in the states that have a capital punishment law.…