Death penalty is becoming one of the major issues of the criminal justice today. With the increasing rate of 3and immoral acts, governments of different countries became strict in imposing their laws especially those that concerns life. As crimes become heinous, punishment for those acts also increases in severity up to the point that the court subjects the criminal to death penalty or capital punishment.
In the United States of America, 35 states are practicing death penalty and some of them would include Arizona, Alabama, Florida, Kansas, Mississippi, Ohio, Virginia, and Washington.On the other hand, the remaining states contradict this act of punishing their criminals with New Mexico as the most recent state who voted for the abolition of death penalty in 2009 (Death Penalty Information Center 2010). Debate about the practice of death penalty started to conjure as issues about the morality of using this form of punishment caught the attention of human rights advocates. Consequently, it brought forth questions that gained the attention of the masses. Should death penalty be instituted or not?Does sentencing criminals to death penalty ensure a decrease in crime rates? Is death penalty a form of justice or a form of murder? Issues about death penalty are like the two sides of a coin: the front and the back, the pros and the cons.
When the word “death penalty” is heard, both proponents and opponents are strongly making their stand to support the arguments they are presenting. One side would say justice while the other side would say murder. One side would say deterrence while the other side would say killing an innocent man.However, this essay would focus on the issue whether death penalty is successful in deterring crimes or not.
Deterrence is present in almost any from of conflicts and is also considered an important aspect of any criminal law and justice. The concept of deterrence states that potential criminals will be deterred because of the fear of the consequences of their act. If punishments are severe, the criminals will think twice or will never attempt to repeat their offenses, resulting to a decrease in the number of crime rates.However, I stand to my choice that death penalty does not reduce crime rates. The data presented by the Death Penalty Information Center (2010) showed that death penalty does not deter crimes.
There was a comparison between the murder rates of states who instituted death penalty and those that did not. It is found out that from 1990 to 2006, the murder rates in states without death penalty remained consistently lower than those states who have death penalty. In fact, the percentage of murder rates between states who have death penalty and the states who do not have death penalty increases from 0. 34 or 4% in 1990 to 1. 73 or 42% in 2007.
A survey made by New York Times in 2000 also found out that the homicide rate of states with death penalty in the last 20 years is 48 to 101 higher than those states without death penalty. Another data presented by the FBI in 2008 also showed that 14 states without capital punishment had homicide rates at or below the national rate. In addition, the murder rates in states without death penalty has remained consistently lower than those states who practice death penalty (Amnesty International USA 2010).Several studies were also conducted to prove that death penalty does not deter crime. Donnohue and Wolfers (2006) studied a research concluding that death penalty actually saves lives and its credibility is being questioned. After the study, the authors stated that the research will bring forth an exact opposite of the conclusion when proper methodologies were used using the same data, that is, death penalty increases the crime rates specifically the number of murders.
An article made by Fagan (2006) also supported the argument that death penalty does not deter crimes.His article described the errors recent studies about deterrence are facing such as missing variables and data, and improper statistical analyses which are crucial in providing a clear picture of criminal justice. He wrote that: “There is no reliable , scientifically, sound evidence that pits execution against a robust set of competing explanations to identify whether it can exert a deterrent effect that is uniquely and sufficiently powerful to overwhelm these consistent and recurring epidemic patterns.These flaws and omissions in a body of scientific evidence render it unreliable as a basis for law or policy that generate life-and- death decisions.
To accept it uncritically invites errors that have the most severe human costs” (Fagan 261). Claims are also made to support the argument that death penalty deters crime. However, facts are not sufficient to support the said argument. In response to this, Bedau and the American Civil Liberties Union (1992) proposed things why death penalty fails in deterring criminal acts.They stated that in order for a punishment to be successfully deterrent, it must be promptly and consistently executed. Death penalty cannot sustain this since only a small number of criminals are sentenced to death and they become fewer during execution.
In addition, the deterrence of crimes by death penalty is also affected whether the crime is planned or not. If the crime is premeditated, the criminal will not be deterred by the threat of punishment because they expect escape from detection and arrest.On the other hand, a crime that is not planned makes it impossible to think how it can be deterred by threats of punishment since most of the capital crimes are done under the influence of a substance (drugs, alcohol) or great emotional stress. Since bodies of evidence showed that death penalty does not deter crimes, it then leads to brutalization. According to the brutalization theory, “the death penalty and executions, rather than acting to deter the violent actions such as murder, do in fact actually increase the homicide rate through a process of brutalization” (Dorpat 124).
A study was conducted in Georgia to test the brutalization theory and its effect on citizen awareness. Results of a multi-variate series model showed that after publicized execution, there was an increase in the rate of homicides for about 2. 6% or 6. 8% within the month of publicized execution. Upon further analysis, it is found out that around 55 homicides were associated with the publicized execution (Stack 2008). In conclusion, death penalty has little or no impact on deterring the rate of crimes.
Instead of causing deterrence, death penalty leads to brutalization which increases criminal rates.Many still oppose the fact that it does not cause deterrence. Although past studies showed the positive effects of death penalty on deterrence, further researches on these studies revealed the unreliability of the studies as some of them have missing data or variable, or have been conducted using different methodologies. A strict master does not guarantee loyal followers. Just like punishments, a heinous retribution does not mean a decrease in criminal rates. It may lead to an unexpected rise on rates which can be seen as a great problem not only by the government but also by the society.
