does the death penalty deter people from committing criminal acts?

Answer 1

There are two types of deterents, specific and general. A specific deterent is one that deters the individual being punished from committing a crime again. A general deterent is one that deters people in general from committing a crime because they fear the punishment they might get.

Now the death penalty if an excellent specific deterent...the executed person will certainly not commit any more crimes at all.

As a general deterent, it's not so good. Back in merry old England they had public hangings. Now here is where it gets interesting. These hangings would draw crowds of spectators, even vendors selling snacks, etc. Back in those days picking pockets was an offense punishable by death. Now here's the kicker...there were pick pockets actually working the crowds at publich hangings and other types of executions! So, I think we can safely say that there is sufficient historical proof that capital punishment is not a general deterent.

Additionally, there have been several studies comparing states with the death penalty and those without it as well as studies looking at the years in the late 1970s when the death penalty was temporarily banned in the United States and comparing the crime rates with times before and after. There is not scientific data or research that supports that the death penalty is a general deterent.

Answer 2

I don't know the answer from a statistical standpoint, but in my opinion, no it doesn't. I mean look at how long someone on death row is there. They could be sentenced to the death penalty and spend 20 years fighting their sentence. Depending on the age of the person, it is more likely they would die of natural causes than from actually being executed. NOW, if getting sentenced to the death penalty actually meant that you get sentenced, and are given say a week to get your affairs in order, and then they juice you, no ifs, ands, or butt's about it, then maybe it might deter some criminal activity. The problem with it is, that it's not actually just done.

Answer 3

Human beings are not born with an innate morality. Morality, or immorality, is learned behavior and/or beliefs. Morality is implanted into people by the process of socialization whereby the rights and wrongs of the external world are adopted.

It is obvious that the death penalty is no deterrent for convicted murderers. As for people who have never murdered anyone, it is nearly impossible to determine whether the death penalty is the reason, or if it is because the possess no violent tendencies.

Now, if we were to take someone from a tribe in a jungle somewhere where murder was common and not taught as wrong and introduced him into a society with the death penalty and consequently explained to him the consequences of murder; then certainly should we have implanted a thousand of these jungle individuals into civilization who had previously murdered, them the death penalty would prove to be a deterrent to some percentage of them.

With all of that stated, over the years I have come to be against the death penalty due to known erroneous convictions / executions and because of a lack of faith in the integrity of a jury's ability to reason due to the effects of psychologically knowledgeable lawyers. Also, there is no minimal intelligence requirement in order to sit on a jury where a life hangs in the balance. Those lacking intelligence are highly inclined to emotional verdicts as opposed to deliberate and thoughtful ones.

Answer 4

Obviously not since the prisons are jammed full of criminals on death row.
When someone commits a crime that is punishable by death I would think that they either had to be pretty pissed off or looney tunes oh yes or high on drugs and the only thing in their head at the time is what they are doing not what is going to happen once they get caught. The world will never be free of crime sad to say.

Answer 5

Statistically there is no consistent evidence that the death penalty deters criminal actions.

I'm against the death penalty because it's too humane; too merciful.

I think a more fitting punishment is a life sentence because you are forced to live in prison conditions ... prison conditions are notoriously nightmarish all around. Sudden death is too merciful.

Answer 6

It deters them if they believe the death penalty is used in their state. Otherwise, they know that it's just a slap on the wrist. The death penalty needs to be used to be effective.

Answer 7

There is no way to know that it does or doesn't.

I will say this, if someone murders somebody I love I will be watching when they pull the switch and it will make me feel better. Deterrence is not the only reason we have the death penalty.

One more thing when someone is put to death they have a zero percent rate of recidivism. People who get life in prison still commit crimes in jail.

Answer 8

The lack of existence Penalty has statistically shown that it has no impression on crime. maximum, or all, convicts who're sentenced to lack of existence have dedicated homicide, it truly is likewise actual that many murderers are sociopaths and do not care at excited by themselves or others. it truly is likewise actual that many murders are crimes of pastime, the position the attacker is ate up by using emotion and disregards the outcomes. subsequently, the shortcoming of existence penalty does no longer deter murderers from killing. in certainty, it may in some circumstances, supply the killer incentive to kill lower back because they're going to die besides. on the different hand, the shortcoming of existence penalty receives rid of the prospect of them escaping or making parole and killing lower back.

Answer 9

It definitely deters the ones that are put to death.

About the others, there is truly no way to know if they pay attention.

Answer 10

Dosen't matter if it does or does not. Its a punishment. You pay a fine in traffic court BECAUSE you were speeding not to keep you from doing it, people are free to be dumb enough to break any law they choose.