Capital Punishment and DeterrenceAbstractCapitol Punishment has been around since the beginning of mankind; eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth. Since then the public have debated for or against capital punishment revolving around issues of deterrence, retribution, discrimination and Irreversibility. Leaving us with the responsibility to analyze the factors surrounding capital punishment. A number of studies have also been done specifically on the deterrent effects of capital punishment. Many officials believes that capital punishment not only prevent s the offender from committing additional crimes but deters others as well. The research of Franklin E.
Zim ring and Gordon J. Hawkins demonstrated that punishment is an effective deterrent for those who are criminally inclined. Another research has been to examine murder rates in given areas both before and after an execution. Clear and cole (2000) have examined more than 200 studies evaluating the effectiveness of the death penalty in deterring crime.
A recent study found that a significant deterrent effect is associated with the increased use of capital punishment since 1977 (Dezhbakhsh, Rubin and Shepherd, 2001).
Michael Radelet and Ronald Akers attempted to determine if having the Death Penalty indeed act as a deterrent on criminal homicide. Is the theory of “Just Deserts” (Bedau, 1978; Finckenenauer, 1998) in anyway credible? It is also often argued that death is what murderers deserve, making criminals reap what they sow. Most believe that in order to assure deserts, the punishment should always fit the crime. It would require us to rape rapists, torture torturers, and inflict other horrible and degrading punishment on offenders. It would require us to betray traitors and kill multiple murderers again and again, punishments impossible to inflict.
The Essay on Capital Punishment As Deterrent
... support the view that the death penalty is or is not an effective deterrent in controlling crime. Opponents of capital punishment argue that it is ... removed in various areas and countries. None of these studies establish that the death penalty results in lower murder rates or that ...
(Bedau 1978).
However the principle of just deserts is understood to require that the severity of punishments must be proportional to the gravity of the crime, and that murder being the gravest crime deserves the severest punishment, then the principle is no doubt sound. But it does not compel support for the death penalty. What it does require is that crimes other than murder be punished with terms of imprisonment or other deprivations less severe than those used in the punishment of murder. Criminals no doubt deserve to be punished, and punished with severity appropriate to their culpability and the harm they have caused to the innocent. But severity of punishment has its limits — imposed both by justice and our common human dignity.
Some whose loved one was a murder victim believe that they cannot rest until the murderer is executed. Many people oppose capital punishment because they feel it is discriminatory. Studies show that most criminals that have been executed in the last decade are white rather than black although a higher percentage of minorities are on death row. An increasingly controversial issue is whether racial class influences who receives a death sentence and who is executed. As a recent justice department reported that in nearly 80 percent of the cases in which the prosecutor sought the death penalty the defendant was a member of a minority group.
Bald us et al. (1983) and Bohm (1994) have conducted studies of the death penalty cases in Georgia. The y found that both race of the offender and especially the race of the victim were associated with death penalty outcomes. In particular, killers of whites were more likely to receive the death penalty than killers of African Americans.
Second, we can and should acknowledge that some discrimination does take place in the criminal justice system. Discrimination takes place not only on the basis of race, but on the basis of wealth. Wealthy defendants can hire a dream team of attorneys to defend themselves, while poor defendants must relay on a court- appointed public attorney. It also is evident that the burden of capitol punishment falls upon the poor, the ignorant, and the underprivileged members of society.
The Research paper on Capital Punishmen Death Punishment Penalty
Against Capital Punishment Against Against Capital Punishment Essay, Research Paper Against Capital Punishment At 8: 00 p. m. it was nearing the end of John Evans last day on death row. He had spent most of the day with his minister and family, praying and talking of what was to come. At 8: 20 he was walked from his cell down to the long hall to the execution room and strapped in the electric ...
It is the poor, and the and the members of the minority group who are least able to voice their complaints against capitol punishment. Their impotence leaves them victims of a sanction which the wealthier, better represented, just- as- guilty person can escape. So long as the capitol sanction is used only against the forlorn, easily forgotten members of society, legislators are content to maintain the status quo, because change would draw attention to the problem and concern might develop. Ignorance is perpetrated and apathy soon becomes its mate, and we have today’s situation. (Thurgood Marshall- Furman V.
Georgia) Although some may favor capital punishment, there has been growing concern over the miscarriages of justice. These miscarriages are a result of the growing use of DNA testing proving that certain individuals have been wrongly convicted after spending many years on death row. Since 1973, 96 people have been released from death row because it was determined that they have wrongfully convicted (Death Penalty Information Center).
Some of these individuals were release just days before their execution. Some research suggests that at least 25 innocent people were executed during the twentieth century (Radelet and Bedau 1998).
The most common errors were incompetent defense lawyers and police and prosecutors who suppressed evidence.
CONCLUSION Decades of research have failed to produce any persuasive evidence that the death penalty is more effective than life imprisonment as a deterrent to murder (Bailey & Peterson, 1997; Lampert, 1981).
Police and prosecutors, under pressure to solve heinous crimes as quickly as possible, conduct slipshod investigations, rely on doubtful eyewitness identification and the questionable testimony of jailhouse informants, fail to consider new evidence that points to innocence and sometimes even hide it, or obtain false confessions by threats and psychological coercion (Gross, 1998; Liebman, Fagan, & West, 2000; Radelet, Bedau, & Putnam, 1992; S check, Neufeld, & Dwyer, 2000).
The Essay on Justice Not Death
... innocence, but death deprives an individual of this benefit. ... individual of due process of law. New evidence might prove a person's innocence, but death deprives an individual of this benefit. ... criminal punishments, it is irrevocable. Death forever deprives the individual of due process of law. New evidence might prove a person's ...
