Which do you believe is more effective in preventing crime: severity of punishment or certainty of punishment?

Question

Say you can't have both, although that would be ideal.

If you were considering breaking the law, would you be more likely to commit the crime if you KNEW you were going to get caught, but the punishment wouldn't be that severe (interpret for yourself)?

Or would you be more likely to commit the crime if there was a chance you would get away with it, but any punishment WOULD be extremely severe (interpret for yourself)?

Think back to disobeying your parents as a teenager if that helps.

Answer 1

Certainty, by far.

If you check clearance rates of most crimes, they are low enought that your average criminal does not think he is going to be caught. The average clearance rate for a property crime is about 20%. That means 4 out of 5 do not get caught.

I think the idea situation would be certainty for first offenses, and severity for repeat offenders.

Answer 2

Certainty. Prevention isn't happening. Severity might help some. We are hypocritical in that we allow too much to go on without punishment before it progresses to more serious crimes. That's why Jesus taught that murder and other heinous crimes begin in the heart, progress to "fighting words" as the law puts it, then when it is finished it brings forth death.
I say our nations crime problem is a lack of certainty in morals. A Godless nation lacks the ability to understand and respect the proper boundaries God has set. The good news is that God is still in the business of changing hearts the way that no social rehabilitation program will ever be able to. (Most sex offenders will re-offend as soon as they are released.) Every civil law which is morally just, when it is broken it is always because someone broke God's law, namely that of loving the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and to love thy neighbor as thyself. God designed the first moral laws and the dire consequences for breaking them. If we will get back to the basics of retaining God in our knowledge, we can once again be a great nation. Sin is a reproach to any nation. Don't forget that even if evil men escape judgment in this world, they will certainly not escape it in the next. God will make all things right on the great day of Judgment. Will you be ready? Is Jesus your advocate?

Answer 3

One or the other doesn't work -- because both are part of the formula of assessing risk versus gain.

A low possibility of a severe punishment is about the same deterrent as a high probability of minor punishment -- because that's how the math works on the balance.

You need both -- the severity and the likelihood of punishment -- for things to actually be a deterrent. History has conclusively shown that, in every other permutation that we've tried.

Answer 4

Neither is a deterrent.

And of course I would pick certainty.

Reality is crime prevention begins while the criminal is a child and before he commits his first crime.

The punishments don't matter and don't stop any criminal.

As we incarcerate a greater percent of our citizens than any other country, you would think we would start figuring this out. But we can't.

Figures

Answer 5

Certainty

Answer 6

Certainty.

Severity doesnt matter much when your chance of getting caught is so low (just look at the war on drugs)

Answer 7

Either will do because right now its a small chance to get caught and when you do you get a slap on the wrist.

Answer 8

I agree with Gem.... Punishment is not meant to deter crime, it is meant to punish criminals.

Answer 9

I don't know that either is more effective.......most criminals never believe they will be caught.