jump to last post 1-15 of 15 discussions (105 posts)

Is the Death Penalty a Deterrent?

  1. Don W profile image80
    Don Wposted 6 years ago

    In jurisdictions that maintain capital punishment are the rates of aggravated murder and felony murder lower than in jurisdictions where capital punishment has been banned?

    1. lady_love158 profile image60
      lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Probably not. Criminals always believe they can escape prosecution otherwise there wouldn't be any crime. One thing the death penalty does prevent is, a repeat offense.

      1. Don W profile image80
        Don Wposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Does a life sentence with no possibility of parole not achieve the same?

        1. Cagsil profile image60
          Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Not really considering the could escape and do more damage. The possibility is there and cannot be denied.

          1. Don W profile image80
            Don Wposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I agree, it is a possibility. So does the risk of escape and repeat offence outweigh the risk of wrongful conviction and execution? Which is easier to achieve, ensuring convicts in maximum security prisons don't escape, or ensuring 100% accuracy in the court system?

            1. Cagsil profile image60
              Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Neither are reasonably achievable. So, that would tell you that the application of the death penalty should change.

              1. John Holden profile image61
                John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I can't find any evidence of a category A prisoner escaping in the UK. Those especially murderers tend to be rather well guarded.

                1. Cagsil profile image60
                  Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Define a category A inmate?

                  1. Hollie Thomas profile image60
                    Hollie Thomasposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Technically, in the UK at least, or at least when I was a Probation officer many moons ago....I'm getting there, a category A prisoner was one convicted of serious offences and there was a reasonably high risk of them re-offending. However, many prisoners who have not committed serious offences, such as prolific shoplifters for example, will often find themselves in category A high security institutions, thereby caretorized as a cat A prisoner. On the other hand, prisoners who have committed very serious offences can, after a period of time earn category D status and find themselves in an open prison. So, it's all just BS really. IMO

      2. Shinkicker profile image92
        Shinkickerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        The death penalty also prevents the restoration of justice when someone is wrongly executed

    2. wilderness profile image94
      wildernessposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Is that a reasonable question to ask? I assume you are trying to establish a causal relationship, but are there other attributes of those jurisdictions that might cause the same result?

      Or should you be asking is there anywhere that the death penalty has been applied that has seen a repeat offense?

      1. Don W profile image80
        Don Wposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Yes I think there are other variables that would affect murder rates, and of course correlation is not causation. So it's likely that statistics alone are not a reliable indicator of the effectiveness of capital punishment as a crime reduction method. What other factors could be looked at?

        Regarding repeat offences, does a life sentence without parole not achieve the same thing?

        1. wilderness profile image94
          wildernessposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          It could.  If the inmate does not escape, is actually never paroled or forgiven his crimes and does not manage to hire someone outside the prison to do the wet work for him.

          The death penalty, on the other hand, produces none of these (slim) possibilities.

          1. Don W profile image80
            Don Wposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            So it's a choice between reducing and eliminating those slim possibilities, or ensuring the justice system is 100% correct 100% of the time. Which might be easier to achieve?

            1. wilderness profile image94
              wildernessposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              It being that perfection is not possible for humanity, it would seem that the only choice is eliminating those slim possibilities.

              I may be weird and different, but my own personal choice of dying or living a life behind bars without any chance of freedom would be death.  A few years is one thing, the rest of my life is quite another.

              1. Don W profile image80
                Don Wposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I agree, the justice system can't be 100% correct 100% of the time, which leaves the possibility that wrongful executions will happen in the future. Is this an acceptable price to pay for eliminating the slim possibility of a prisoner escaping? Could the possibility of escape be reduced to something negligible without relying on execution?

                There are certainly others like yourself who'd prefer death to life imprisonment. In that case isn't a life sentence more of a punishment than a death sentence? And doesn't it also eliminate the possibility of future wrongful executions?

                1. Cagsil profile image60
                  Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Again, that depends on the application of said sentence, doesn't it?

                  1. Don W profile image80
                    Don Wposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Does the application of a sentence allow 100% accuracy in the justice system, or the elimination of the risk of escape?

                2. John Holden profile image61
                  John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  At the risk of becoming boring, I repeat that several British mass murderers have chosen to end their own lives rather than serve a lifetime in prison.
                  It would seem that a life sentence is considered more of a punishment than death.

                  1. CASE1WORKER profile image79
                    CASE1WORKERposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    John- You are probably quite right as it means that the prisoners life is controlled by others, which is hated by serious criminals I am sure

                  2. Don W profile image80
                    Don Wposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Does anyone consider death more of a punishment than a life sentence, and if so why?

    3. jeff61b profile image90
      jeff61bposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      If you’re a Tea Partier, then by definition, you pretty much hate government. But if you are a Tea Partier who supports the death penalty, then you support giving the government you hate, the right to kill you.

      1. Cagsil profile image60
        Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Actually, that would be untrue, based on my hubs written on this topic.

        Government has the right to domestic and foreign threat protection. The death penalty is only a tool, designed for a specific use, in order to create a more civilized society. wink

        1. John Holden profile image61
          John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Ugh, what is civilised about strapping somebody to a bench and then taking several hours to kill them!

          1. Cagsil profile image60
            Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Hey John, go read the hub. Did you really think I would explain it in the forums when I have two separate hubs that address the issue.

            1. John Holden profile image61
              John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Cags, I saw nothing in your hubs that specifically addressed the civilised effect of strapping somebody to a bench and then have untrained people kill them over the space of as much as a couple of hours or more.

              I don't think the human rights of the criminal come into the equation but I do think the humanity of those sanctioning the death penalty does.

              BTW, though we don't seem to be as plagued with mass murders as you, two of the most significant recent ones have managed to end their own lives before trial. Not much perhaps but an indication that the death penalty is no deterrent for that type of killer.

              1. Cagsil profile image60
                Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                John, it's about eliminating the MORE dangerous people from society. Duh! It has a civilized effect on the rest. And as for killing people over a span of hours....that was most certainly addressed. Do try to read with more comprehension.
                This makes no sense. And shows you've no understanding of the greater good.
                And, it depends on the application process of using it. Those types of killers, mass murderers and serial killers, need to be eliminated from society and shouldn't be put on the shoulders of the taxpayers backs to house them. It's unfair to the taxpayers and waste necessary resources. These type of people have no hope of being fixed and cannot be released, so them taking up a cell, eating food, getting clothes and medical care is absurd.

                1. John Holden profile image61
                  John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  You say it's about eliminating the more dangerous people from society, seems a bit strange coming from a man from the country with some of the most dangerous leaders in the western world.

                  And why does the dehumanising effect of killing not make sense, if we as a society sanction murder, for whatever reason, does that not reduce us all to the lowest level? Surely rather than a lack of understanding of the greater good, a complete understanding.

                  There should be no price or value on justice, go down that road and you reach the point where some are more worthy of justice than others and who is to be the judge of that? If it is to be cheaper to execute somebody than to imprison them we get back to the days when men were executed for petty theft or for speaking out against the government.

                  1. Cagsil profile image60
                    Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    The most dangerous leaders in the western world is an interesting statement, however, that is something else I am working on. It's best left up to the citizens to handle them.
                    No. Because there are some that simply cannot handle themselves, and like rabid dogs, must be put down in the interest of society. What part are you not understanding?
                    Why must others be forced into a situation not of their making?
                    That's just distortion. Equality and preservation of society is the greater good. Those who are unable to handle themselves, such as serial killers and mass murderers is the exclusive lot it should apply to. Quit trying to make more out of it than there is.
                    BS. More distortion.

    4. nenytridiana profile image61
      nenytridianaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      In my opinion, the death penalty could be applied when at least:
      1. Security level of an area is already very high. So that crime can be prevented until close to zero.
      2. 99.999% of people already have high awareness of the law.
      3. Legal officer is completely trustworthy and have high ability in finding the truth / evidence. Thus less likely to make mistakes in deciding a death penalty.
      4. Welfare of society must reached the level of prosperity.
      5. There are institutions that take care / fostering to the families of the condemned.

    5. profile image0
      kimberlyslyricsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      no

  2. Cagsil profile image60
    Cagsilposted 6 years ago

    Death Penalty isn't used a deterrent. It's used as a tool for pleading out more often than not. hmm

    It's more a political tool also, so as to divide people and confuse what is in the best interests of society.

  3. profile image0
    Wentworth35posted 6 years ago

    The US has the death penalty, yet has a very high murder rate, whilst the UK has not had the death penalty for 50 years, yet murder is relatively low.

    1. wampyrii profile image76
      wampyriiposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      And let's not forget WHY the UK abolished capital punishment in the first place. Of course, surveys now say the majority of the British people want it brought back again for certain crimes....at least until the courts screw up and we hang some more potentially innocent people again.

      1. Hollie Thomas profile image60
        Hollie Thomasposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        It's not the majority of British people. They are a section of society, not a majority.

        1. wampyrii profile image76
          wampyriiposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          A large section. The number I read was 51% in a Gallup poll, admittedly a couple of years ago. That's a majority, no? Some other polls have it 70% or higher or 99% amongst Sun readers apparently...although, no one cares what they 'think' tongue

          Yes, yes I know surveys and statistics are taylor made to suit the answer the pollster wants to hear but at best it seems to be somewhere around a 50/50 split right now at least among people who can be bothered to answer surveys.

          1. John Holden profile image61
            John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            However the vast majority of MPs, of all parties, are opposed to it.

            1. wampyrii profile image76
              wampyriiposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Thankfully.

              1. John Holden profile image61
                John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Indeed.

                A strong argument against the referendum style of government.

          2. Hollie Thomas profile image60
            Hollie Thomasposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Yes, however, that's hardly a scientific study but I get your point.

  4. Manly Man profile image61
    Manly Manposted 6 years ago

    Research has shown that the deterrent effect of capital punishment is minimal and it's a waste of time an money as well. Not to mention that the error rate is not insignificant.

    1. Cagsil profile image60
      Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You're not talking about error rate of death penalty. You are in fact talking about the error rate of the courts. Which should tell you that if applied properly, then the error rate of the courts wouldn't become a worry. smile

      1. Manly Man profile image61
        Manly Manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        ??True, the courts sometimes err in convicting and sentencing innocent people accused of capital crimes. Once they are executed the courts' errors aren't susceptible to correction. Davis's execution was a court approved lynching. There is no "proper" way to apply the death penalty. The concept is morally and practically flawed.

        1. Cagsil profile image60
          Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Untrue. I've two separate hubs dedicated to the death penalty and it's usage. wink

    2. jcmayer777 profile image74
      jcmayer777posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      That's my main problem with the death penalty.  People are convicted for crimes they don't commit.  I doubt it happens often, but it does occasionally make the news that new evidence shows someone convicted is innocent.

      I suspect few people have gone to commit a crime and stopped for fear of the death penalty. Plus, many of these crimes are in the heat of moment, when consequences aren't considered at all.

      1. Cagsil profile image60
        Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        That only means that a new application process should be considered, don't you think? I've done so with my hubs on the topic. wink

  5. Paul Wingert profile image77
    Paul Wingertposted 6 years ago

    If the death penalty was a deterrent, there wouldn't be any murders in this country.

    1. Cagsil profile image60
      Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Hey Paul, that's not true either.

      1. Paul Wingert profile image77
        Paul Wingertposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Yes I know you're right. Kinda of a lame comment on my part.  At one time, In this country and probably still in others to this day, it was a captial crime for horse theft and robbery and a laundry list of others. But those offenses still flurished.  There are monsters who can be put to death and no one would blink an eye. But on the other hand it's much more costly to put a convict to death than it is to give them life without.

        1. Cagsil profile image60
          Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Incorrect. Have solution for the costs. Check out my two hubs on the topic. I'm sure it's never been thought of or even considered. lol

          1. Paul Wingert profile image77
            Paul Wingertposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            How about sending all the appeals and court hearings overseas and use foreign lawyers? When a condemned convict calls his/her lawyer, it'll be like calling tech support. Save a bundle! lol

  6. wampyrii profile image76
    wampyriiposted 6 years ago

    Since it is unlikely anyone who commits a crime expects to get caught, I severely doubt the death penalty has any effect at all on actual crime rates.

    Quite honestly, given the choice of being caged for the rest of my life or being put to death, I'd take the latter. Not much of a deterrent.

    1. John Holden profile image61
      John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      As did Fred West, Harold Shipman et al. Oh don't forget Ian Brady who has been protesting for years for the right to die.

  7. Hollie Thomas profile image60
    Hollie Thomasposted 6 years ago

    John, correct. Not one, they could cause mayhem within but they could not get out, no way. From my perspective that would be impossible, unless of course you come across a friendly prison officer that would gladly give you his uniform and keys.

    1. John Holden profile image61
      John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Isn't "friendly prison officer" an oxymoron?

      1. Hollie Thomas profile image60
        Hollie Thomasposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        In my experience absolutely, however, I'm sure they'll be other hubbers that have met one and think they probably should run for President in 2012 lol

  8. Danny R Hand profile image60
    Danny R Handposted 6 years ago

    I myself am against the death penalty. However, I do not begrudge others of their belief. I would only suggest that the judge who gives the sentence should be the person to carry it out. If the ones who give a sentence of death had to do the killing, maybe they would be more inclined to be sure of guilt themselves.

    1. Cagsil profile image60
      Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Again, separate the court system from the tool known as death penalty. Two separate things.

  9. aware profile image72
    awareposted 6 years ago

    In its current state i think no. It takes 20 years to  kill  these people.  And when it finally happens   its painless.And great pains are taken to insure they don't suffer. Coddled  and tucked in .  Not  the way id prefer we deter.

    1. Cagsil profile image60
      Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Agreed. But, my thoughts in my hubs, eliminates the civil rights issue that they must go humanely. lol Cause, they would go humanely. lol

    2. John Holden profile image61
      John Holdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Do you really think it is painless? There is a lot of evidence to suggest the opposite.

  10. aware profile image72
    awareposted 6 years ago

    John  i hope its not. painless that is.
    Im cant say im proud to  say that.
    Its ugly .
    ray

  11. Mighty Mom profile image91
    Mighty Momposted 6 years ago

    As conceived, no!
    As stated well by another poster, the criminal mindset believes it is above the law and can/will get away with it. Seeing some other dude get put to death will not deter me, if I am so inclined, from going out and doing what I'm gonna do. Because I think I can pull it off.

    As administered, absolutely not.
    The system is fraught with prejudice and inequities and inaccuracy.
    Way too many innocent people (proportionately) get put to death.

    My opinion: Life in prison without possibility of parole -- meaning don't even bother with your annual appeal for 20 years while sitting on death row -- seems to me a much saner, not to mention humane, sentence.

    1. livelonger profile image90
      livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Agreed, and empirical evidence seems to support this: the death penalty does not seem to deter murder or other capital offenses.

      It's more expensive, and strikes at most people's sensibility to not kill unless it's necessary to save a life.

      The only "leg" to stand on - to give victims' families some justice - seems odd when most are executed decades after they were sentenced.

      1. Cagsil profile image60
        Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        A problem that has a solution. smile

    2. Cagsil profile image60
      Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Hey Mighty Mom,

      Have you read my hub on the subject?

      Btw- nice to see you. smile

      1. Mighty Mom profile image91
        Mighty Momposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Haven't but will go do so!
        Good to see you as well.

        Can someone here explain to me why it is that the pro-lifers are the ones who support the death penalty?
        Oxymoron?

        1. Cagsil profile image60
          Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Pro-liters are mostly confused individuals who blindly follow someone else's advocating. lol

          1. Mighty Mom profile image91
            Mighty Momposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Well ok, then.
            Who is at the helm of advocating these two seemingly (at least in my mind) diametrically opposed viewpoints.
            Even nuns are against capital punishment!

        2. livelonger profile image90
          livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          The death penalty advocates are usually Protestant, specifically evangelical, Christians. Catholics are generally against the death penalty, in line with Vatican doctrine.

          About thirty years ago, most evangelicals were also pro-choice; most churches, even the SBC, were pro-choice. From what I understand, the change in doctrine was at the hands of a number of Catholic intellectuals, who apparently have been instrumental in shaping evangelical social issue doctrine from the 80s onward. (Funny, when you consider how much evangelicals tend to hate Catholics)

          1. Mighty Mom profile image91
            Mighty Momposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Very interesting.
            Catholics are not real vocal on this issue currently.
            We have our own demons we are wrestling with in the Church.
            I read recently that Pope B was going home to a less than welcoming reception.
            There is a lot of push/pull to make BIG CHANGES in the doctrine (celibacy of priests, role of women) and clean up the horrible wreckage of priestly indiscretions with underaged (and even adult) parishioners.
            roll

  12. aware profile image72
    awareposted 6 years ago

    It  stops re-offenders .  Its not right  . its not justice . or revenge.
    Its punishment
    thats a movie line
    ray

  13. aware profile image72
    awareposted 6 years ago

    Even killers hate child killers .The answer is in there somewhere i think.

  14. aware profile image72
    awareposted 6 years ago

    I think its important to support and encourage contrary thinking and ideas. That way we cover all bases.Especially  on such a finite matter  as this. Everyone should be weighed in , and their feelings respected . Complicity  no matter how minute Is cumbersome . State issued killing is killing. Its................
    Sometimes necessary .
    Its ugly
    ray

    1. Cagsil profile image60
      Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      But, talking in circles never accomplishes anything but does build frustration. lol

  15. Hollie Thomas profile image60
    Hollie Thomasposted 6 years ago

    Cagsil and John, whoa, cool it! Sleep, depending on your time zone and start again tomorrow. There's enough s*** and disagreement in this world, between the sane and the less so. I, personally, would put both of you in the former category.

 
working