DETERRENCE THEORY

The Re-Introduction of the Death Penalty Is Ultimately Justified By Deterrence Theory

The Re-Introduction of the Death Penalty Is Ultimately Justified By Deterrence Theory

Introduction

Death penalty can be defined as the sentence of death for a person who has committed a serious crime. The punishment is given to the criminal by the state. A criminal is held liable for the death penalty only for those crimes that are known as capital crimes or capital offences. Due to the issue of human rights and religious debates death penalty is a highly controversial issue. In some of the countries this controversies has ignited to such an extent that that the government has to decide to abandon provision of death penalty.

Deterrence

Deterrence means prevention and avoidance. The major justification for the death penalty is its perceived ability to deter or prevent “would-be” murderers from killing. While death penalty proponents argue that death penalty is a more effective deterrent than alternative punishments, death penalty abolitionists maintain that executions are no more effective than long-term imprisonment. As a result of this debate, no other issue related to the death penalty has received more systematic attention in legal and academic communities (Sampson & Cohen, 1988, 165). The debate on the deterrent effect of death penalty appeared to be resolved in the academic community until the mid-1970s when economist Isaac Ehrlich challenged earlier comparative studies that found no deterrent effect for death penalty. He criticized these studies on numerous grounds, most notably their failure to take into account the certainty of execution and to control for numerous criminal justice and socio demographic variables that were correlated with homicide rates. Ehrlich (1975) conducted his own study which corrected for the shortcomings of previous deterrence research and concluded that each execution prevented, on average, seven to eight homicides. It is important to note that, over the past several years, a handful of econometric studies have emerged, again challenging conventional wisdom and reporting a deterrent effect for executions. These studies suggest that each execution deters anywhere between five and eighteen homicides (Ehrlich, 1975).

Perhaps the major justification for the death penalty is its perceived ability to deter “would-be” murderers from killing. According to deterrence theory, criminal sanctions are most effective at preventing crime when the sanctions outweigh the benefits/gains from engaging in particular criminal activity (severity), there is a high probability that the offender will be caught if she or he engages in criminal activity (certainty), and the sanction is administered promptly so there is a close connection between the criminal activity and the punishment (celerity). While death penalty proponents argue that capital punishment is a more effective deterrent than alternative sanctions, death penalty abolitionists maintain that executions are no more effective than long-term imprisonment. As a result of this debate, no other issue related to the death penalty has received more systematic attention in legal and academic communities. Early research was largely unsupportive of the deterrent effect of capital punishment.

Researchers comparing homicide rates of similar states with and without the death penalty and ...