Death Penalty and Deterrence Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words - 1

Death Penalty and Deterrence - Essay Example The death penalty is an ultimate punishment which may provoke criminals having low motives to refrain from crimes however such crimes are usually committed under the extreme state of mind or for significant motives, therefore, the fear of death can have limited effectiveness in deterrence from crimes. Definition provided by Grimes (2010) states, â€Å"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 the tendency of ensuring that crime is avoided due to its fear. According to the American Civil Liberties Union (2012), there are limited shreds of evidence as to how ca pital 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 an 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), â€Å"in the USA at least, only a small mi nority 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 convict 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 the 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 taking place in the state of extreme emotional pressure, substance abuse or traum a 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 the court’s decisions greatly, these grey areas can be used by criminals and lawyers for avoiding conviction.