Does Capital Punishment Reduce the Homicide Rate? Essay

A mere mention of the phrase "capital punishment" is more than enough to stir up a heated debate between the proponents and detractors. Indeed, capital punishment is a contentious subject that has attracted the attention of many academics, researchers, philosophers as well as policy-makers seeking to provide evidence or sound arguments that would resolve the controversy. However, the data that emerges from these scholars still prolong the controversy as some of the researchers or philosophers argue in its favor whereas others go against it. As a result, some states have, that have legally allowed capital punishment, have dropped it while others have adopted the sentence with the hope that it will reduce crime. Theoretically, the death penalty is seen as a punitive measure that potentially deters crime which in effect will lead to lower homicide rates. However, practically, this law can possibly have collateral consequences which might affect innocent people, insane, juveniles or minorities resulting in a scenario whereby it is disadvantageous to a given group. Given the toughness of the capital punishment on the criminal offenders, it would be expected to reduce homicide rates; however, that is not the case because capital punishment does not deter crime and that some other correlated factors contribute to higher crime rates despite death penalty including the fact that criminals do not consider the consequences at the time of crime, that death penalty is arbitrarily administered and that capital punishment is a cause of homicide rather than preventive.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Capital punishment does not reduce homicide rates because it does not deter crime as thought to be. The only pragmatic argument in the pro-death penalty side is the deterrence (Mocan & Gittings, 2003). This is to say that in arguing for legalizing capital punishment, the proponents draw from the logical perspective that a death penalty for a criminal offender who kills another person is sufficient to warn any other person with intentions of murder as he or she will be aware of death sentence awaiting should he or she be found guilty of the murder. Going by this logic, it is quite clear that failure of capital punishment to deter crime would not have an impact on homicide rates, but it may increase if other factors play in. The premise of such a claim is the fact that whereas it may be easily asserted that lack of tough punishment for the criminals convicted of murder may lead to recurrence of such criminal behaviors, the truth might be a third factor (or a combination of factors) correlated to higher rates of homicides (Lamperti, Marshall & Nixon, 2004). If that is true, it follows that even though capital punishment might potentially reduce homicide rates; there would be no gain in implementing it since the third factor (or a combination of factors) would still contribute to the higher rates of murder crimes.

It is even intriguing that there is no substantial evidence to show that capital punishment is directly related to deterrence casting doubts as to whether it may reduce homicide rates. For many decades, homicide rates have been higher in states that had capital punishment with legal status in those that did not legalize it as a punishment. Data collected between 1973 and 1984 indicate that homicide rates in states where capital punishment was not exercised remained consistently lower averaging 63% as compared to corresponding rates in those states that issued the death penalty for murder convicted criminals (Lamperti et al., 2004). This evidence is backed up by a study conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation which also should that murder rates in ten out of the twelve states that have not accepted capital punishment are below the national standard while 50% of those states applying capital punishment have homicide rates above the national standard (Leocadio, 2010). Another study by the New York Times concluded that crime rates could increase or decrease in any given state independently whether or not capital punishment is in place (Espejo, 2003). It is a position also asserted by another study which found that seventeen of the twenty biggest cities in the United States, and where death penalty in practice, still present the highest homicide rates in the nation (Mitchell, 2001). No deterrence is seen here. One would expect to see a situation in which homicide rates have drastically reduced following the execution of criminals convicted of murder as it would send a warning signal to those intending to engage in murder crimes. If capital punishment had a deterrence effect, it should have played a significant role in lowering homicide rates in the states where it has been legalized or is practiced.

Given the undeniable evidence that capital punishment lacks a deterrence effect which could be the reason why it does not reduce homicide rates, it is also possible that some other correlated factors contribute to high murder rates despite death penalty. Perhaps, there is a psychological aspect to the issue as it has been argued that criminals, at the time of committing homicide, do not consider the consequences of their actions. According to Carlsmith, Darley, and Robinson (2002), the psychological mindset of the person involved in criminality is such that he or she cannot perceive the consequences of the crime at that moment of undertaking it. Also, the majority of the people who commit homicide crimes are from impoverished parts of the United States. A high percentage of such individuals have mental issues (Carlsmith et al., 2002). This means that most of them do not apprehend well the consequences of the murder or are not even aware of the existence of capital punishment. For such individuals, the death penalty will not make any sense, and they will undertake homicide despite the existence of the penalty. For this reason, the death penalty cannot reduce homicide rates.

Also, capital punishment is arbitrarily administered leading to a situation whereby it cannot reduce homicide rates since is not used equally to punish murder criminals. Most often, the death penalty is applied when the offender is from a minority race or is not able to acquire a highly competent lawyer. In this case, contrary to the expectation that capital punishment would be used to punish serious crimes, it corresponds to who the defendant is (race) and socio-economic status. For example, in Florida and Georgia, it is observed that when a black kills a white, 20% and 17% respectively of the black criminals are sentenced to death. Conversely, when a white kills a black in Florida or Georgia, 5.2% and 2.9% are convicted and sentenced to death (Leocadio, 2010). Undoubtedly, the above data indicates a disparity in the application of the death penalty as a deterrence to homicide among the blacks and the whites is evident. It is also observed that some of the people avoid the death penalty, even if they had played a role in the homicide, can play around with the justice system through highly competent advocates and evade the harsh and perceived deterrent punishment (Leocadio, 2010). Given the above, it can be concluded that the application of capital punishment as a crime deterrent tool is skewed and for this reason fails to reduce homicide rates as is not seriously adhered to and used for its proper purpose.

Furthermore, capital punishment is often the cause of murder itself leading to higher homicide rates because of resulting deaths. According to Lamperti et al. (2004), some people attempt suicide by homicide. For example, in Oklahoma, a truck driver parked his vehicle in Texas roadside cafe to have lunch. A farmer from the nearby walked in and shot him using a shotgun. The police disarmed the farmer and asked him why he did so, and he said he was just tired of living (Lamperti et al., 2004). This might be one of the many examples of cases where people kill others so that they can die through capital punishment, and whenever this occurs, homicide rates go up instead of reducing in states that allow the death penalty.

On the other hand, the proponents of the capital punishment go ahead in their defense to argue that besides deterrence, the death penalty is a moral issue that is even backed by some religious basis. The morality is based on the premise that the death sentence is proportionate to the harm caused by the criminal to the murder victim. They further believe that a death sentence prevents convicted murderers from ever killing other persons (Williams, 2003). Whereas this is a valid position, it is contestable. First, capital punishment, when applied in this manner, is even further increasing the homicide rates. Second, there are other ways of preventing criminal murderers from further killings. For instance, life imprisonment can be a human way of punishing the convicted murderer. After all, even if the convicted murderer is killed, that cannot bring back to life the victim. Third, other people would use homicide to cause murder which would not be the cause if one knew that he would end up in life imprisonment if he kills and found guilty.

Conclusion

Capital punishment does not reduce homicide rate; instead, it accelerates it because of its failure to act as deterrence as well as other correlated factors playing a part in contributing to the killings. Capital punishment was primarily fronted as a means of discouraging and perhaps stopping homicides, but there is no pragmatic evidence showing its success in preventing criminal murders. Once capital punishment failed to deter homicide, some people have decided to use it as a way of causing murder. Such individuals kill others so that they can be executed knowing well that they will not suffer any other form of punishment for their murder charges. Capital punishment has also been arbitrarily applied instead of applying it objectively to deter crime. As such, capital punishment has created a means through which some people from certain races or with certain socio-economic status escape death sentence due to the skewed manner in which the punishment is administered. Finally, capital punishment cannot reduce homicide rates because murderers have psychological issues that do not allow them to consider the consequence of their actions while undertaking the crime. Thus, capital punishment cannot reduce homicide rates, and alternative punishment methods should be considered.

References

Carlsmith, K. M., Darley, J. M., & Robinson, P. H. (2002). Why do we punish? Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(2), 284.

Espejo, R. (2003). Does capital punishment deter crime. Greenhaven Press and the Gale Group Inc.

Lamperti, J., Marshall, J., & Nixon, R. M. (2004). Does Capital Punishment Deter Murder?. URL (consulted 17 May 2004) http://www. dartmouth. edu/~ chance/teaching_aids/books_articles/JLpaper. pdf.

Leocadio, P. (2010). Evaluating the Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment on Crime. CUTY Academic Works.

Mitchell, R.H. (2001). The death penelaty. Greenhaven Press, San Diego, Carlifornia.

Mocan, H. N., & Gittings, R. K. (2003). Getting off death row: Commuted sentences and the deterrent effect of capital punishment. The Journal of Law and Economics, 46(2), 453-478.

Williams, M. (2003). Is the death penalty fair?Greenhaven Presss;Sandiego,California.