Should the U.S. Abolish the Death Penalty?

Recommend (0) Comments (2)

“It is likely that somewhere in the range of 5 to 18 innocent lives are saved per execution,” claims the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation. Any study that claims to have formulated results so specific as to tie a number of executions to a number of murders naturally leaves room for much skepticism. The fact is that most studies that claim this sort of conclusion are wrought with errors in their methodology. I could cite multiple analyses of these studies that come to this conclusion, as well as multiple studies that refute the deterrence theory, but I will link those in the evidence section below rather than wasting waste space here.

What it comes down to is logic. The Criminal Justice Legal Foundation states that “It is a basic principle of human behavior that incentives matter.” This is true, if one knows what those incentives are. Most people who receive the death penalty in this country are poor and have little education - 95% of those on death row could not even afford their own attorneys. It is unlikely that they know about the death penalty laws in their state, and therefore it is impossible to argue that the death penalty could act as a deterrent. In addition, in the heat of the moment when a murder takes place, it is difficult to imagine one even considering the likelihood of whether they will receive the death penalty, let alone that effecting their actions. Amnesty International completely agrees that people who commit murder must be punished and removed from society – that is what prison is for.

The death penalty is an incredibly expensive endeavor that often delivers a false sense of justice to victims’ family members and risks irreversible errors. If it were repealed, money saved could go toward real crime prevention, such as placing more police officers on the street. This to me seems an undeniably obvious deterrent – no citing of obscure studies needed here.