It reduces crime
A very good question, and I guess it depends on how you wish to interpret the facts.
In the United States, 23 people were executed (21 by lethal injection, two electrocution), through mid-August, 2018 according to a CNN report. A total of 39 death sentences were mandated, and through July 1, 2017, 2,817 people were on death row throughout the various prisons in the U.S. Also as of August, 2018, 31 states had the death penalty in one form or another.
In my mind, that's not a lot of people who are being executed, or awaiting execution in comparison to certainly all crime, but even to that which generally rises to the level of a death penalty conviction—murder and a few other crimes, such as treason—those numbers seem pretty low.
So, if few people are actually being convicted, let alone executed, and yet crimes that could draw a death penalty sentence are constant or up, I would say, no, the death penalty has not been an effective deterrent. According to at least one source I read, the south, where the bulk of the death penalty convictions are actually carried out, murder and other crimes have not gone down.
Regardless, I believe there are factors at work here which should be considered:
1. What does it take to get the death sentence? Some states are relatively lenient, so the same violent crime could be multiple life sentences with various options for parole in one state, while garner the death penalty in another.
2. How quickly are the sentences carried out? In nearly all cases, there are legal battles that take place well after the convictions. Some end up in stays of execution (for one reason or another, including a person actually being innocent), while others go on indefinitely. In other words, those convicted of the death penalty are rarely, if ever, executed quickly.
3. What type of individual is committing crimes that will receive the death penalty? Typically it's the hardened criminal, one who has been in prison for an assortment of different crimes that become more violent over time. They are folks who, for one reason or another, effectively place little value on human life. It could be mental illness, it could be irrational decision making, it could be pure evil. These kinds of folks aren't likely to be deterred by anything.
Based on the answers to these questions, and probably more, we might get to the effectiveness of the death penalty as a deterrent, if properly implemented, from the sentencing to the time in which it takes to be carried out. As it is, it doesn't appear to be enough of a deterrent, certainly not as much as it could be. The likelihood of the changes being made to make it so, however, are slim to none.
It would definitely help reduce crime. The countries that have the death penalty take too long to execute the criminals.
I will take South Africa as a prime example which has some of the highest murder rates in the world. I know if hanging was introduced tomorrow the ones committing the crimes would reconsider their actions.
Word would soon spread that the authorities are not playing and crime rates would fall.The ones that continue with the murders would then be happy with the punishment as they had been warned.
Removing the serious offenders from the prison system will ease the pressure on the system.Prisons are full currently and this would open up more beds for the others coming in.
No. I do not think that it is very effective. Look at the US for example. They have high crime rates despite having the death penalty in some states and full jails.
I believe it does. If there are no consequences for your crime then you will continue to be a worthless piece of crap in society. I think they should make the death penalties more accessible to people so we can see the consequences of people's bad decisions.
I don't believe so. Even how severe a country's punishment for crimes is, there will still be people who are not afraid of it. Crimes cannot be prevented. However, reducing crimes maybe.
It is actually not surprising to me that alot of individuals on the death row do really have some low cognitive functioning, or mental illness, or some head injuries,or some brain damage, or some fetal alcohol syndrome, or some kind of serious trauma, or some other possible "bad brain" problems... Many of these people were also horribly victimized when they were kids, which is just a single fact among many other facts,the victimization messes with the heads of those individuals...
The fact is that most People with the normal right mental capacity do not actually generally commit the crimes which are "worst of the worst" crimes... People who actually think straight do not actually become serial killers, or they do not torture anyone intentionally.., etc. Some may seem to look or feel smart in terms of an IQ, but the fact is that their thinking is still broken.....
We also have to really remember this when we considering the prevention question: who are we actually trying to reach?the truth is You and I might really be deterred by a capital punishment such as death penalty, but then again, i feel society do not really need the death penalty to deter an individual...because even without it, we are actually not going on some kind of shooting spree....i believe those people that the society is trying to reach by creating the dealth penalty are those individuals who might really commit these worst crimes....
but another fact is that most Potential perpetrators of these dangerous and horrific crimes are frequently or often unable to actually connect the right dots properly between an instant choice and also the actual deterring punishment.... To be really deterred by a death penalty then they must also actually realize that there is a chance that they will get caught and that the jury of peers would actually not in fact see the situation in a sympathetic manner.... Many of these actual true heinous crimes are really committed under an influence of some powerful drugs and/or emotions, which are also barriers to a clear reasoning.....