Death Penalty and Deterrence - Essay Example

Death Penalty and Deterrence Death penalty or capital punishment for heinous crimes such as murders has been a subject of intense debate all across the globe. There are many states employing this form of punishment for crime deterrence although there is limited evidence about its effectiveness. Human rights activists and other independent bodies have raised many questions about limited deterrent nature of this punishment as compared to sentence spent behind the bars. On the other hand, there have been studies that have proved similar percentage of crimes in those states that have and do not have capital punishments. Death penalty is an ultimate punishment which may provoke criminals having low motives to refrain from crimes however such crimes are usually committed under extreme state of mind or for significant motives therefore fear of death can have limited effectiveness in deterrence from crimes. Definition provided by Grimes (2010) states, “Deterrence includes the direct and indirect benefits of punishing offenders: specific or direct deterrence refers to the inability of the offender to commit any further crimes due to the extent of this particular form of punishment, while general or indirect deterrence presumably serves to deter the general public from committing the offense(s) which resulted in the death sentence for the death penalty (p. 2010)”. Therefore, capital punishment is expected to have tendency of ensuring that crime is avoided due to its fear. According to American Civil Liberties Union (2012), there are limited evidences as to how capital punishment contributes to reducing crime rates. It is important to note that a punishment or penalty imposed by law can be deterrent to a crime when its severe enough against the crime committed, can be applied with certainty and up to a just level of frequency. On the other hand, capital punishment although daunting ensures that a criminal does not have to suffer adequately for the severe crimes committed by them as compared to a lengthy imprisonment. It is argued that a punishment can only serve its purpose of deterring crime and also providing justice to criminal as well as the victim if it has consistency and adequacy in it. However, it is difficult to find these characteristics in a capital punishment. Firstly, despite increase in capital punishments in the last few decades, the actual percentage of execution is limited mainly because of after sentence investigations and appeals after conviction. According to BBC U.K. (2012), “in the USA at least, only a small minority of murderers are actually executed, and that imposition of capital punishment on a "capriciously selected random handful" of offenders does not amount to a consistent program of retribution. Since capital punishment is not operated retributively, it is inappropriate to use retribution to justify capital punishment.” In order to protect the rights of convicted, necessary measures are required to be taken to ensure that wrong convicts are not punished and the punishment itself is adequate enough under the protection provided by constitutional rights as well. Such lengthy measures undermine the effectiveness of capital punishment. Since these processes are time taking and ratio of appeals’ success is relatively higher, therefore the punishment itself appears to have leniency in it negating its deterrent nature. Secondly, the crimes for which capital punishment is imposed are usually take place in state of extreme emotional pressure, substance abuse or trauma which questions the mental stability of a person to make logical decisions regarding his/ her actions (American Civil Liberties Union, 2012). On the other hand, there have been cases reported in which crimes were committed for self-defense or by those whose mental health was questionable. Since these factors have a tendency of affecting court’s decisions greatly, these grey areas can be used by criminals and lawyers for avoiding conviction. Due to this flexible nature of investigations, the threats imposed by a sentence or punishment in deterring crime reduce to a greater extent for a criminal or a convict (Radelet & Lacock, 2009). It is important to note that when high profile crimes are committed in a planned manner, criminals usually plan out an escape mechanism as well that would provide them protection against arrest and further investigations. On the other hand, criminals having extreme motives have little fear of consequences. Therefore, fear of death is not threatening for them. A simple example of it can be a terrorist who has been planted for suicide bombing would have no or limited fear if a death penalty is imposed on him. Thirdly, if a frequency and severity of a punishment are the traits that one should look for in a punishment then life sentence or imprisonment offer a more enduring impact. Usually, a criminal is aware of the fact that a consequence of such crime would be an immediate death that would provide limited suffering. It has also been observed that some criminals convicted and provided with death penalties receive extraordinary publicity for their crimes. This undue attention provokes other criminals who are willing to gain attention from public and society to commit severe crimes instead of deterring it (Grimes, 2010). In addition to that, there have been instances reported where fear of death penalties have actually instigated crimes. Warden (2009) reports one such case in his research by discussing how two Los Angeles police officers were attacked and one of them was killed for merely stopping a car which did not had an illuminated plate. Since reason of stopping for not known to two men in the vehicle who were apprehended for a series of robberies, they attempt their escape assuming that the officers have recognized them. In this case, it can be seen that fear of death penalty actually enhanced the risks of severe murders instead of reducing them. On the other hands, when criminals intend to take their own lives but fear of doing so, they commit crimes of high intensity that ultimately provides them with their desired punishment. Fourthly, the purpose of punishment is questioned greatly in case of death penalties. Since the purpose of a punishment is to deter the recurrence of wrong deeds, final execution does not provide any lessons to the criminal or to the society. Therefore, there is limited learning factor involved here. Warden (2009) presents an argument that the capital punishments are usually provided when a criminal has committed severe crimes like murder or assault. These instances or crimes have a typical nature and do not reflect a greater percentage of crimes. Therefore, such punishment is inadequate to deter crimes in greater masses. Other than sociological and psychological grounds, there have statistical evidences that there are no or limited differences between states where death penalty exists and has been banned by government (Donahue & Wolfers, 2005; Fagan, 2006). Therefore, there are limited scientific evidences regarding effectiveness of death penalty has a deterring agent. Death penalty has been debated over centuries by scientists and scholars. There are limited empirical evidences which support the hypothesis that this form of punishment has any major effectiveness in preventing crimes. Literature review helped in reaching a conclusion, high profiles criminals tend to have limited fear of death mainly because of mental instability, extreme motives, flexible nature of death penalty and chances of success of appeal against capital punishment on human grounds and medical reasons. On the other hand, it is argued that there have been instances reported when fear of capital punishment, having media coverage or social fame that would not have been possible otherwise or incentive of giving up one’s life provoked convicts to commit severe crimes. Hence, states are required to consider their policy in terms of death penalty and evaluate its benefits against its cons. References American Civil Liberties Union. (2012). The Case Against Death Penalty. Retrieved from http://www.aclu.org/capital-punishment/case-against-death-penalty BBC UK. (2013). Arguments against Capital Punishment. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/capitalpunishment/against_1.shtml Donahue, J. J. & Wolfers, J. (2005). Uses and Abuses of Empirical Evidence in the Death Penalty Debate. Stanford Law Review, 8(58), pp. 791-846. Fagan, J. (2006). Death and Deterrence Redux: Science, Law and Causal Reasoning on Capital Punishment. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 255(4), pp. 255-387. Grimes, J. (2010). The Symbolic Capital of Capital Punishment: A Scholarly Reflection. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Criminology, 2(1), pp. 178-199. Radelet, M. L. & Lacock, T.L. (2009). Do Executions Lower Homicide Rates?: The Views of Leading Criminologists. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 99 (2), pp. 489-508. Warden, R. (2009). Reflections on Capital Punishment. Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy, 4(2), pp. 329-359. Read More