does the death penalty prevent crime?

Answer 1

I don't think it does. I think that it prevents the person who is executed from committing any more crimes, but it doesn't do much to deter anyone else. I live in Canada, and there's no death penalty here, and crime isn't much of a problem. If the death penalty was that important, I'd expect the crime rate here to be a lot higher.

Answer 2

1

Answer 3

There is no good evidence that the death penalty has a deterring effect.

Ordinarily, this would be difficult to demonstrate. Proving a negative is near-impossible, since it would require exhausting considerable efforts is looking for credible research. Even then, your only 'proof' would be your own inability to find it.

This situation is different, because the amount of effort already spent on this issue has done the work for us.

First, look to litigation regarding the death penalty. The fact that those parties, such as the solicitor general, fail to adduce any evidence in favor of a deterrent effect is de facto proof that it doesn't exist, since you can be certain they would have used every resource in their power to find one.

Second, look to the powerful lobbies in favor of the death penalty. You can bet that they have done extensive research, since a study supporting the theory of deterrence would be of considerable value to you.

Therefore, one can conclude that 1. the matter has been thoroughly studied, and 2. an exhaustive search through those studies has failed to turn up any evidence that the death penalty deters crime. Not proof, surely, but it is evidence as good as you're going to get that something doesn't exist.

Although not dispositive, there is research that indicates it has no effect on crimes (see below)

Answer 4

For a punishment to act as a deterrent, it must be swift and sure. Over 120 people have been released from death rows (since 1976) with conclusive evidence of their innocence. Many had been on death row for well over a decade. If the process is speeded up, we will certainly execute innocent people.

The death penalty does not prevent crime. Homicide rates are higher in states with the death penalty than in states without it.
Most killers do not think they will be caught (if they think at all).

Life without punishment is on the books in 48 states. It means what it says, and it is swift and sure. It is also rarely appealed.

Answer 5

I am going to take this question to a different level. You see when the word crime is described, it means: an act that is committed or omitted in violation of a law forbidding it or commanding it and for which punishment is imposed upon conviction. If committing a crime is punishable then shouldn't the government be punished for recommitting that same crime. Murder is murder. NO matter how you look at it.

Statistically, the crime rates have gone down in some States but not in others. It's an up and down battle every year and I think it stems from society itself. Bringing life into this world when you have no money and then the child growing up only to learn how to steel to get what he needs. All society.

I'm still kind of on the fence on this one, as if hypothetically speaking here, someone were to murder my family or friends and the person was caught, I might want him to personally die for what he did to them. But that just starts every thing back from square one.

I'll definitely keep an eye on the answers you receive and thanks for asking this question. Hope some of my wisdom, helped!

Answer 6

I feel that the death penalty would be a great deterrent against murder and the like if it was enforced, and if the convicted criminal has been proven without a doubt to have done the crime. what good is the death penalty if the get to live out their lives on death row at tax payers expense, by the time they use our appeals and the like their more likely to die of old age than to be put to death. My Better question would be is it fair that prison inmates who have done heinous act towards humanity get better health care than those of us law abiding citizens. Isn't it like 45% of children are without health insurance in this country. But prisoners get the best health care possible.

Answer 7

Well, obviously the one who is executed isn't going to commit any more crimes.

It doesn't work as a deterrent though. It's just common sense, if you're an impulsive, maybe desperate and not very bright person, the thought of you being put to death as you commit a capital crime is probably not going to cross your mind.

And the misery that an execution leaves in it's wake would probably be more likely to create more angry and impulsive people who are more prone to deperate acts.

Answer 8

Since it is not used across the entire USA, NO. With all the appeals, etc., it seems people who have been sentenced to death seldom die, unless they stop the appeals and actually request to be executed. Now with these criminals using the legal injection as cruel and inhumane, many executions have been stopped in states with the death penalty. Hey these individuals KILLED someone, tortured them, etc., so why should "we" care if they die in pain or misery?

Where else can a criminal get free meals, discounted if not free medical, a free gym, and possible cable TV?

Answer 9

I believe it would if the deaths were more publicised. But we hide this ugly part of our society from the weak public. And it reduces crime by getting rid of criminals. I don't think that there are a lot of people on death row that have committed only one act of violence, they are usually violent repeat offenders. Hang a man in Iraq and show it online and TV…… electrocute or inject someone in your states prison, and hide it so no one gets disturbed. It's asinine! People should be disturbed by it, to prompt people to be better behaved citizens.

Answer 10

We would have to effectively use the death penalty to find out the answer to that question. As it sets we execute so few inmates that it could almost count as not having a death penalty. Only with full enforcement and minimal appeals could we ever learn whether or not it would.