by David K McMillin

Created on: December 23, 2009   Last Updated: December 24, 2009

The death penalty is not designed as a deterrent to crime, rather it is the penalty and consequence of the most heinous crimes. To call the death penalty a deterrent is really to misplace the concept of punishment within the crime and punishment cycle.

To use the death penalty as a deterrent requires the use of a human being as an example. An example in this case would be defined as a trial, a sentencing, and an execution viewable by all people either at the state or federal level.

In the United States, the last public execution to fall under the viewable clause took place on August 14, 1936 in Owensboro, Kentucky. Rainey Betha, a 22 year old man, was hanged in front of 20,000 spectators for the rape and murder of Lischia Edwards, a 70 year old woman.

Whether the execution of Rainey deterred any future murderers is questionable at best. It did, however, prevent Rainey from committing any further murders.

To further explain. Human nature is such, that each time an action is taken, it becomes easier to take the same action again. The divorce rates make a good illustration of this point. Of all the first time marriages only 41% get a divorce, of the second marriages 60% divorce of the third marriages 73% divorce (www.divorcerate.org).

These rates show that each consecutive time an individual divorces, the decision to break their vow becomes easier, a kind of divorce inoculation. The same concept applies to those who commit crimes. The prisons in this country are filled not only with first time offenders but also repeat offenders.

In 2007, 15.5% of those returned to prison had already served time within the last year and in 1994, 67.5% of all released prisoners were back on the inside within three years of their release. (Bureau of Justice statistics)

Are these prisoner returning because they have been institutionalized or are they returning because committing a crime is easier the second time around?

Back to the question of deterrence. The only deterrent provide by the punishment of a crime is the prevention of a repeat offense both on the inside and outside of prison walls. Does this mean that a crime should not be punished to the full measure? Not at all, law by its very nature is an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth system.

If you steal a man's wallet, you should have to payback what you took with an additional amount. If you break a persons leg, you should have to cover all the cost for care and loss in wages with interest. If you murder a person, the only repayment for blood spilled is to have your blood spilled; in other words execution.

It should be noted that the greatest moral teacher in history, Jesus, never condemned the execution of murderers. While hanging on a cross next to two condemned prisoners he never made mention of any immoral judgment or action in their punishment, only that they could be forgiven for their past and would receive mercy in the final judgment.

Learn more about this author, David K McMillin.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.