Pros And Cons Of Deterrence

729 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Principles of deterrence theory

If it is society’s goal of the prison system is to preserve life and keep suffering to a minimum, then the death penalty is a justifiable cause. Many would argue that this is in itself a contradiction, however, this assumption is wrong. Studies show that the death penalty saves between 4-18 lives on average. What this means is that although the death penalty may kill one human, this action can deter up to 18 potential murders. Those against the death penalty argue that this deterrence is no greater than the deterrence of life in prison. However, this only seems to be the case in states that do not normally enforce the death penalty. States such as Texas that have condemn more than 5 people a year to the death penalty have a higher rate of deterrence than those …show more content…

For if the deterrence theory is correct, then the death penalty has a constant contribution to saving human rights. If the theory is wrong, then society is not saving anymore human lives through the death penalty. The inconclusive nature of these studies suggest that it is better to kill murderers because the possibility of deterrence is there. This possibility of deterrence justifies their death because it is better to kill a guilty man in an attempt to save innocent lives, than to assume that the deterrence does not work, which would allow for more deaths of innocent lives. In other words, it is better to kill those who are found guilty due to their crimes as a means of possible deterrence, than to allow for this possible deterrence to disappear, allowing for more murders to be committed in society. What is being weighed here is the worth of a criminal’s life vs. the life of an innocent. When attempting to sustain both overall life and minimal suffering, it is better to kill a guilty man over the possibility of an innocent being

Show More
Related

  • Writing Assignment 1

    731 Words  | 2 Pages

    According to Radelet & Borg (2000), deterrence was, in the past, the most frequently-cited reason for arguments in support of the death penalty. The claim stems from a belief that potential criminals will be less likely to commit severe acts of violence if they know that those who carried out similar crimes before them were put to death – in much the same way that heads on pikes at the gates of a city were intended to deter criminal activity in the Middle Ages. Recently, however, many studies have concluded that the death penalty offers no significant deterrent effects, and the few which claim to find support for these effects have received substantial criticism (Radelet & Borg, 2000). The majority of both criminologists and law enforcement officers surveyed expressed that they do not believe the death penalty offers any difference in the amount of violent crimes committed (Radelet & Borg, 2000).

    Read More

  • Deterrence Theorists and Capital Punishment

    909 Words  | 2 Pages

    Deterrence theorists view murder as rational behavior, and assume that in calculating the gains and losses from killing, potential offenders are aware of the death penalty and regard it as a more severe sanction than imprisonment. Because the threat of one's own death presumably outweighs the rewards gained from killing another, murder is not an option for most people and always discouraged. In addition, some noted proponents assert that capital punishment provides an important educative function in society by validating the sanctity of human life (Berns, 1979; van den Haag, 1975; van den Haag & Conrad, 1983). Despite this logic, some challenge the applicability of deterrence to murder. Rather than being a product of deliberation and calculation, it is known that most murders are emotionally charged and their crimes are spontaneous events; they are "acts of passion" or result from a situated transaction rather than from deliberation (Bowers & Pierce, 1980; Chambliss, 1967; Luckenbill, 1977). Indeed, a significant proportion of homicides may not be intended. The situation escapes calm discussion, or due to some extraneous factor, an assault victim dies. Under such conditions, it is unlikely that perpetrators ("killers") give serious thought to whether they reside in a death penalty jurisdiction, or the possibility of execution.

    Read More

  • Deserving to Die

    1394 Words  | 3 Pages

    Robert Lee makes many arguments to argue justification of capital punishment in his article, “Deserving to Die.” Some of the stronger ones involve the deterrent effect of the use of the death penalty, why the cost of execution is so high, and how the use of the death penalty increases overall public safety. In Lee’s first argument, he argues that the use of capital punishment helps reduce overall crime by acting as a deterrent to crime. In at least one respect, capital punishment is unquestionably a deterrent, as Lee puts it, “It simply cannot be contested that a killer, once executed, is forever deterred from killing again” (142). Of course, a deceased killer can never kill again, but the effect that death penalty has on others, potential future criminals, is the important question. Lee argues that whether or not it is a deterrent, relies on how swiftly and surely the death penalty is executed. The majority of people are afraid of dying, and if they could choose, would prefer not to die anytime soon. This proves how the death penalty can be a deterrent to other potential criminals to not kill someone, out of fear that they will be put to death themselves. There have also been some circumstances where actual statistical evidence proves the deterrent effect of capital punishment. In the time since the Utah Supreme Court ruled in 1976 that capital punishment be legalized again in the state, there have been three executions. After each of the executions, specifically the year after the executions took place, there were significant decreases in both the number and the rate of murders within the state, compared to previous year(s) (Lee 143). Lee himself does acknowledge that of course there are other variables that could have influence...

    Read More

  • The Role of Marginal Deterrence and Its Practical Application

    2271 Words  | 5 Pages

    The 2002 crime figures for England and Wales comprised of two separate reports, brought together for the first time: (i) Crime statistics recorded by constabularies and (ii) The British Crime Survey (BCS), based on 33,000 interviews. The BCS is regarded as a more reliable measure of actual levels of crime because it includes experiences of crime that go unreported. The British crime survey of 2002 revealed:

    Read More

  • Capital Punishment: Annotated Bibliography

    1737 Words  | 4 Pages

    Capital punishment, a topic that is constantly debated, is questioned on whether or not it serves its purpose which is to deter criminals and if it is morally acceptable. It is my goal to evaluate arguments that promote or reject capital punishment and its deterrence factor. It would be beneficial comparing crime statistics for states that uphold and states that abolish capital punishment. Finally, an investigation of criminals facing the death penalty and their thoughts as well as modern prison conditions will provide insight to this debate. Capital punishment could be a great deterrent to crime or it may have no effect at all.

    Read More

  • The Death Penalty

    853 Words  | 2 Pages

    The death penalty continues to be an issue of controversy and is an issue that will be debated in the United States for many years to come. According to Hugo A. Bedau, the writer of “The Death Penalty in America”, capital punishment is the lawful infliction of the death penalty. The death penalty has been used since ancient times for a variety of offenses. The Bible says that death should be done to anyone who commits murder, larceny, rapes, and burglary. It appears that public debate on the death penalty has changed over the years and is still changing, but there are still some out there who are for the death penalty and will continue to believe that it’s a good punishment. I always hear a lot of people say “an eye for an eye.” Most people feel strongly that if a criminal took the life of another, their’s should be taken away as well, and I don’t see how the death penalty could deter anyone from committing crimes if your going to do the crime then at that moment your not thinking about being on death role. I don’t think they should be put to death they should just sit in a cell for the rest of their life and think about how they destroy other families. A change in views and attitudes about the death penalty are likely attributed to results from social science research. The changes suggest a gradual movement toward the eventual abolition of capital punishment in America (Radelet and Borg, 2000).

    Read More

  • Death Penalty Essay

    777 Words  | 2 Pages

    The people in support of the death penalty say that if murderers are sentenced to death, future committers will think about the consequences before they actually proceed with the crime. However, most murderers don’t expect or plan to be caught and weigh their fate. Because, murders are committed when the murderer is angry or passionate, or by drug abusers and people under the influence of drugs or alcohol ("Deterrence (In Opposition to the Death Penalty)”). Therefore, it will not deter future crimes and will actually increase the amount of murders because of society. As previously stated, the death penalty isn’t proven to prevent future murders and/or crimes because it actually increases the likelihood of committing murder. It doesn’t prevent future murders because it would upset the family and friends of the person who was executed. For example, if someone was executed by the death penalty and it was someones family member, then the person who lost their loved one by the execution would most likely commit murder in anger. If that person was executed the next family member would get angry and so on. The cycle would never end and would have more murders. There is no final proof that the death penalty is a better deterrent than other options. Not having the death penalty would be better because it could save many lives. For example, United States a country that uses the death penalty has a higher murder rate than Europe or Canada which are countries that do not use the death penalty. To get a little specific, the states in the United States that do not use the death penalty have a lower murder rate than the states that do.

    Read More

  • Death Penalty Essay

    1757 Words  | 4 Pages

    Throughout the United States violent crime has been a persistent problem that state governments are constantly trying to contain, if not eliminate. When a crime arises to the severity of the death penalty many times people instantly jump to the support of pro capital punishment , thinking that the accused should be put to death for killing another person. Currently updated as of 2011, there are 34 death penalty states and 16 states that have abolished the death penalty. In deed, very few issues are as polarizing as that of capital punishment. Support for the death penalty crosses all lines of race, socio-economic status, and religion. Given the right climate and circumstances, anybody can be quick to judge, convict, and condemn. Aside from the vengeful feeling of ‘an eye for an eye’, people are in favor of the death penalty because they feel it deters criminals and its less taxing on our penal system. However, what they fail to realize is that the death penalty has not been found to do either of those things, in fact, states without the death penalty have had consistently lower crime rates. Likewise, people are not correctly aware of what the results of the death penalty have really produced, or that life in prison without parole has been proven to be the more effective and economical path to go. The death penalty has proven to be more costly and a failure as a deterrent to crime.

    Read More

  • Death Penalty Essay

    1506 Words  | 4 Pages

    Between 1977 and 2010, an estimated 8,000 people were on Death Row in the US and out of those 8,000, more than 1,200 were actually executed (Siennick, 2012). Policy makers and scholars have been especially interested in whether the death penalty serves a crime-control function by deterring prospective murderers (Siennick, 2012). This debate on whether or not the Death Penalty is an effective deterrent is important to our society because we need to understand the impact of this ultimate and final punishment. Expectations of deterrence follow from the basic idea that potential murderers decide whether to kill after considering the benefits and costs of killing (Siennick, 2012). The Death Penalty as punishment can be a deciding factor to a potential murderer when they make the decision whether to kill someone or not. There is assorted evidence on whether or not this happens and there isn’t a chosen method to gather data that fully supports this idea.

    Read More

  • The Death Denalty, An Annotated Bibliography To The Death Penalty

    1346 Words  | 3 Pages

    Jacoby believes the death penalty protects society by threatening future murders with fear. Gaes believes the death penalty is necessary because the overpopulation in prisons causes emotional and physical distress. The stronger side of the debate seems to be that the death penalty does not discourage crime at all nor does it help the victim’s family heal. It would be useful to know whether or not death-penalty states as a whole have lower rates of crime than non-death penalty states when arguing for the death penalty.

    Read More

  • Is Capital Punishment Ethical?

    2399 Words  | 5 Pages

    On the other side of the debate, there are those that believe that the death penalty is a deterrent. For most criminals, they are aware of the fact that if they get caught, they will be sent to prison. However, other than being sent to prison, there are not really any other repercussions for committing a crime. They argue that if a person were to be presented with the possibility of the death penalty, they would more than likely think twice about their actions and realize that there are more risks than just im...

    Read More

  • The Ethics of Capital Punishment

    1503 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...s of society thus inhibiting us from committing more crimes. John Lamperti said, “If executions protected innocent lives through deterrence, which would weigh in the balance against capital punishment's heavy social costs. But despite years of trying, this benefit has not been shown to exist; the only proven effects of capital punishment are its liabilities.”9

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Nuclear Weapons

    1262 Words  | 3 Pages

    In 1945, when the Americans bombed Hiroshima, Japan, approximately 140,000 men and women were instantly killed by the effects of American nuclear defense. With such extreme brutality and force how many people must die for one to finally realize the strengths of nuclear bombs and what damage they can cause. Nuclear weapons should be outlawed because they kill thousands of innocent humans at a time, destroy the environment, and inviolate human’s right to moral and personal freedoms.

    Read More

  • Capital Punishment Justified

    1152 Words  | 3 Pages

    "Common sense, lately bolstered by statistics, tells us that the death penalty will deter murder... People fear nothing more than death. Therefore, nothing will deter a criminal more than the fear of death... life in prison is less feared. Murderers clearly prefer it to execution -- otherwise, they would not try to be sentenced to life in prison instead of death... Therefore, a life sent...

    Read More

  • Cumulative Deterrence Essay

    594 Words  | 2 Pages

    Israel could only ensure its long-term security doctrine if she apply cumulative deterrence, limited military decision and excessive use of force in both limited conflict setting and general wars. The nature of cumulative deterrence strategy contains victories in short, medium and long terms that gradually wear down the enemy. It requires multilayered efforts to thwart enemy including excellent intelligence, a broad coalition and a globalized network. On the other hand, since classical deterrence is not successful to deter non-state actors, such as terrorist organizations. Israel should embrace and apply cumulative deterrence that enables her to passivizes her enemies’ direct and indirect attacks.

    Read More

More about Pros And Cons Of Deterrence

Open Document