Amazon.com Widgets

The death penalty should be abolished on the basis that studies have shown it does not deter crime.

Asked by: shaddamcorrinoIV
  • A couple of questions....

    If punishment really is a deterrent (of any crime), then why is there so much more incarceration in this country?

    Also, why are people who defend the death penalty, most publicly, also more Religious? I get "an eye for an eye" but the lessons to learn from Jesus, for example, are not based on the Old Testament.

    Doesn't killing someone because they killed make us no better than them. We should rise above what they did... And, as a society, be better than that.

    I am agnostic by the way and I am not trying to "preach."

  • The Purpose of Punishment is to Stop Crime

    The purpose of any punishment whether it be a parent spanking child or jail time is to inflict obedience. Punishments will create fear of more punishments and therefore develop respect for the authority that authorizes the punishment. This of course is the theory behind punishments, including the Capital Punishment.

    But, there obviously is a problem in the system because crimes are not being deterred. The consideration that the result does not reflect the hypothesis concludes that this theory, or the process, is wrong. There needs to be an adjustment to the policy.

  • Murdering a murderer is it murder

    I find this ridiculous there is a reason canada does not have a death sentence because that would make everyone who suports it a murderer or at least an asset to murder. How can killing someone solve the death of another, what hapens if they were wrongly accused, they would die in cold blood just because some people decided that they should die. Why should anyone have that type of power, who should be able to decide if someone lives or dies. No one should, the death sentence is sick and disturbing and utterly disturbing

  • Yasssssssssssssss i no want death penalties!!!!

    BAD BAD BAD COST SO MUCH FOR PENALTY...
    Seriously though... In Maryland its 3 million to get one signed for death and then they are on the waiting time still paying jail time.. So anyone saying it cost to much to have them in jail they are wrong.. Sorry facts !! :P

  • Yasssssssssssssss i no want death penalties!!!!

    BAD BAD BAD COST SO MUCH FOR PENALTY...
    Seriously though... In Maryland its 3 million to get one signed for death and then they are on the waiting time still paying jail time.. So anyone saying it cost to much to have them in jail they are wrong.. Sorry facts !! :P

  • Can't be too soft.

    People on death row are those who are charged with at least 1 first degree murder. Why should we keep them alive in jails for the rest of their lives, provide them shelter, and food? These are murderers we are talking about.

    The question isn't if the death penalty deters crime. A life sentence and the death penalty probably carry the same deterrence. It's a question of why should we allocate resources to those who have taken the lives of others? Especially when we only provide them a terrible existence locked in cells.

  • I think it should be enforced

    I personally think the death penalty should be revised. In cases like Ted Bundy and others who are clearly guilty of taking a life they should die-point blank. Regardless of race, creed or economic status, I personally think the death penalty, if enforced properly, would deter crime. America has become too soft on the death penalty, I'd clear death row in 1 day, give these people the same they gave their victims. Not sitting on death row 20 years, writing books and making movies. If you are found guilty on Monday you should be dead on Friday, no final meal, no final visits from friends and family, no more building more prisons to house more convicted felons, no more 3 strikes, no more "my mommy didn't hold me enough" rubbish. If you clearly took someone's life, Luis Gravit, Gary Ridway, Robert Pickton, Pedro Lopez, John Wayne Gacys, no more handing out 128 year prison sentences. If you kill you will die and die soon. If it was possible to sentence them to death by immurement I would. There are healthy fears in life, you don't rob a bank for fear of going to prison and you should be afraid to kill someone because you too will die.

  • Not a deterrent, The death penality secures the population's future safety.

    There are some people on this earth who cannot and/or will not improve after years of therapy, medication and jailtime. Some people are just not built to live within our society (or any society where a right to life and to one's safety is in place). We have to take on a utilitarian perspective here. It's for the betterment of the whole. That is the only way for a society to thrive.

  • Unsure, but will play devil's advocate.

    The way the question is worded implies that the questioner presupposes that the sole purpose of the justice and penalty system is to deter crime. This position is contested by many, and it is worthy to note that the word "justice system" does not in any way imply that deterrence is it's goal. Rather, some would argue that man has a right, or even a moral obligation to administer justice for the sake of itself. According to this view, the fact that capital punishment doesn't necessarily serve as a greater deterrent than jail-time doesn't invalidate it's validity as a form of administering justice.
    Having said the above, I would like to challenge the notion that deterrence is a legitimate justification for capital, or any form of punishment. The argument may sound counter-intuitive, but so be it. If man has no business administering justice, why is deterring future crimes a legitimate reason to take someone's life? Can I take an innocent person and frame them with a crime so that I can punish them as a deterrent? Obviously not. But why then is it justified to use a criminal for a deterrent? What is the philosophical connection between the criminal and the deterrence of crime? As I said, it may be counter-intuitive, but I would appreciate if anyone would clarify this for me.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.