An analysis of the capital punishment as an unlawful and ineffective deterrent to murder

Ethics and Law term papers Disclaimer: Free essays on Ethics and Law posted on this site were donated by anonymous users and are provided for informational use only. Retentionists argue that the consequence of death prevents people from committing the crime of murder. It is proven that the death penalty does not deter persons from committing murder, nor does it serve as an example of the consequences of capital crimes to society.

An analysis of the capital punishment as an unlawful and ineffective deterrent to murder

He put all of his faith into cross sectional data in other words, comparing states. However statistically these analyses are discredited. Lets use an analogy—guns effects on crime—and cross sectional analysis.

Suppose the countries with the highest crime adopt the strictest gun control. Even if these restrictions lowered crime, it would appear otherwise.

Economists refer to this as the endogenity problem. The adoption of a policy is a reaction to other events, in this case crime. The only way to correctly look at the data and assume one or the other hypothesis is to isolate the influence of crime on the adoption of the law.

Even in times of high crime we would have less deaths then if the state kept its abolitionist policies. Shepard finds that states that have the DP indeed deter. However, he finds those with more common death penalty usage like Texas have a stronger deterrent effect then those who use the DP less.

But I do believe that people respond to incentives. My opponent also cites the famous Nytimes study, but as John Lott notes: What is much more important is that the states that reinstituted the death penalty had about a 38 percent larger drop in murder rates by This is one credible way to use cross sectional analysis.

And when it is used a deterrent effect arises. Overall, the rise in executions during the s accounts for about 12 to 14 percent of the overall drop in murders. Innocents My opponent argues poor people are discriminated against… He admits they commit crime more often. In other words, this form of profiling after using proper evidence shows overall no innocents executed by the DP.

My opponent cites the DPIC multiple times in this section, however their list is highly flawed. The list made no distinction between legal and actual innocence. We all know the difference.

Much of the time the defendants are given clemency or are let out based on a pardon or legal technicality. In other words, most of the list is false as many of those aquitted where actually guilty but got out based on a technicality [3].

An analysis of the capital punishment as an unlawful and ineffective deterrent to murder

Cambell, an attorney general, notes: Further, the sources for the DPIC list is very weak. Cambell refutes the main studies they cite. Many of the studies used pre-Furman data before the DP was forced to have higher evidence standards.

Capital Punishment as Deterrent - Essay

In other words, the DP is more certain now then it was before Furman, and using this data skews the results. However, the DPIC List also includes other cases in which the conviction was reversed because of legally insufficient evidence or because the prisoner ultimately pled to a lesser charge.

As will be shown, inserting these cases on the List is misleading in terms of assessing whether truly innocent defendants have been convicted and sentenced to death.

In other words, over half of those on the list where truly guilty. Meaning the DP has a Further, the death penalty prevents recidivism and therefore saves many innocent lives. Innocents are, on balance, helped by the DP. My opponent claims poor people are wrongly executed. Poor black males are usually those that commit the most crime [6].In a Gallup Poll, only 34% of respondents agreed that “the death penalty acts as a deterrent to the commitment of murder, that it lowers the murder rate.” In , .

Violates value of life principle, effects on victims and society, ineffective deterrent, may execute an innocent person, and denies chance for rehab Arguments against capital punishment Deters effectively, prison too expensive for life terms, positively effects society's laws, forfeit of killers rights, rehab useless-revolving door, revenge.

Does punishment prevent crime? If so, how, and to what extent? Deterrence — the crime prevention effects of the threat of punishment — is a theory of choice in which individuals balance the benefits and costs of crime. In his essay, “Deterrence in the Twenty-First Century,” Daniel S.

Criminologists report that the death penalty does not deter murder. A recent study published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology reported that 88% of the country’s top criminologists surveyed do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent to homicide.

The death penalty as an ineffective deterrent “Bring back the death penalty and get the rapists, murderers and hijackers off our streets for good,” was one of the impassioned replies I received recently on a public electronic forum. Therefore, according to the supporters of death penalty, punishment has the deterrent effect on criminal because no one can deny the pain punishment causes.

Then, as death penalty refers to depriving one’s life, which brings the largest suffering and pain, the proponents believe it has the most deterrent effect on the potential criminals.

Capital Punishment Is an Unlawful and Ineffective Deterrent to Murder - Research Paper