Death penalty which has been regarded as the strongest deterrent measure has always been regarded as a just response to worst criminals. Its supporters claim it is used to shield society by making sure that the greatest penalty is afforded to the worst crime. However, emerging literature and reasonable analysis shows that the death penalty itself carries certain risk factors, or even tendencies - to aggravate crime rates.

Particularly, the ''death penalty'' has been advocated partially, to the effect that offenders may ''step up'' their criminal activity-performing murder, for example, to prevent their victim's averting of a rape complaint-when threatened with capital punishment for other grave crimes. This fact undermines the idea of a punitive effect of the death penalty, which generates significant ethical and legal questions regarding potential consequences of such practices.

The Nature of Deterrence and the Assumptions Behind Capital Punishment

Capital punishment is all the time defended by the theory of deterrence popular with people primarily those committing crimes will refrain from doing so once they realize the penalty entails capital punishment. Through a possibility of receiving death penalty the justice system aims to discourage individuals, who may engage in capital crimes from doing so through deterring them using threat of having to face capital punishment. This theory is specifically more inclined towards the acts such as murder, rape, act of terrorism, other heinous acts of violence among others. However, as mentioned earlier the rhetorical of deterrence is based on several clear assumptions.

Firstly, it postulates that potential offenders are calculating creatures who calculate potential cost and benefits of propensity for criminal conduct. Second, it assumes that such threats as physical chastisement especially death penalty alone will suffice to discourage those who may be otherwise motivated by strong passion or psychological disorders. Last but not the least it assumes that shortening the time or increasing the severity of penalties will always ensure that one does not indulge in severe behavior. However, as criminological research has time and over pointed out, these assumptions may not necessarily be valid.

Capital Punishment as an Incentive for More Heinous Crimes

Another admitted contradiction of capital punishment is the fact that the death penalty may encourage some offenders to go ahead and commit even worst offences. This is most memorably the case with sexual assault and has lead to the creation of the concept of red zone. For instance, where rape attracts death penalty, a rapist might consider the victim's murder as next desirable step to eliminate the key eyewitness. If the two crimes, rape, and murder are faced with the same extent of punishment the criminal may not even see it as a risky issue to add on the murder. Indeed, from the offender's point of view, it might be even better to silence the victim entirely to decrease the likelihood of apprehension, arrest, or a death penalty.

The matter gets even worse when there are other crimes that have similar penalties in the legal frameworks of the involved legal systems. For instance, while both kidnapping and murder attract capital punishment, a kidnapper might feel that in order to avoid prosecution he must kill the hostage especially if the criminal understands that the chances of being caught are high if the victim survives. Consequently, capital punishment can help shape an offenders wrong incentive environment in which they would ramp up their actions instead of being dissuaded.

Psychological Profiles of Offenders and the Impact of Capital Punishment

Another face of this twaddle is psychological characteristics of offenders. The assumption that all criminals think and behave rationally is a falsity especially in regard to violent offending. Passional, painter, mental, low, and sociopathic involutions actuate people to perform offenses that are not completely logical. As for these people, potential of getting death penalty may not deter them at all because they are not reasoning rationally through fear of consequences, but acting out of compulsion due to their emotional condition.

More features, there are people who carry out terrible crimes like rape, murder, or terrorism may feel they have nothing to lose. If they feel they are still going to be executed no matter the position they take on committing more crimes, then the death penalty may not scare them. This can develop a risky psychological setting for other criminals where they advance to being malicious or plotting manner to avoid apprehension. The suspicion of witnesses or left undesired traces can make them even more violent, arranging for victims that need to be killed for testimony purposes.

Empirical Evidence: The Unintended Consequences of Capital Punishment

There are real-world examples that support this theory The idea that domestic partners and families should be both the principle consumers and focus of the market has seen evidence by this theory. According to research in countries where capital punishment is practice on wide range of offenses, higher levels of brutal crimes are committed by offenders in an effort to avoid apprehension. For example, due to existence of the policy where the appropriate penalty for aggravated rape is death in India, legal scholars have argued that this policy may encourage murderers by rapists. Rapists go out of their way to make sure that their attackers cannot identify them again for fear of being put to book.

In fact, when as a result of the 2012 Nirbhaya case in India several men were convicted and sentenced to death for a brutal gang rape and murder, the legal community discussed whether this expansion of the death penalty for rape might entail more such killings. Others said the law can make rapists go to an extra mile of killing their victim by giving equal punishment on rape as that for murder.

Of course, it is rather challenging to provide clear statistical support to this problem because crime statistics is not as simple as, for instance, voting rates Within the reference frame of the current culture of sharing stories, feedbacks, experience and / or researches of legal professionals and law enforcement officers such concern has a solid background.

Lessons from Other Jurisdictions: Alternatives to Capital Punishment

That is why capital punishment as an option that can become a crime escalator has led to reconsideration of this measure in many countries. Many countries especially in Europe have done away with the death penalty and replaced it with life imprisonment which seals off with the offender's life meaning such punishments take away the motivation for the offender to commit more heinous crimes.

Many nations, including Norway that forbids capital punishment focusing more on rehabilitation of the offenders, violent crime rates are low. The rationale given here is that elimination of death penalty as one of possible outcomes of the offender's apprehension removes a factor that may make him feel pressured into eliminating witnesses in order to avoid getting caught or takes him to even more grievous level of offense.

Furthermore, countries which no longer are practicing death penalty pay emphasis to an effective prevention of crimes, a betterment of the police force, better forensic services and more attention to victims. They are strategies which seek to prevent crime rather than have penalties once crimes have been committed. What has worked best in these nations is for them to cultivate a justice system that focuses on the prospects of being caught and Arrested than the punitive consequences that they proffer on criminals.

Policy Implications and the Need for Proportional Justice

Since capital punishment increases the level of crime intensity, politicians should consider the organization and the use of criminal sanctions. It should therefore be possible to design a justice system which will punish, deter and reform without escalating violence.

There is a potential strategy which can be applied to implement the above mentioned changes, One of them can be made an effort to distinguish between harsher punishments for serious crimes such as Rape and murder. Hence the legal system should ensure that different crimes attract different punishments in order to eschew encouraging the offenders to engage in more serious criminal activities because they are already in deep water.

Moreover, correcting the punitive model of sentencing as a measure of proportionality of the punishment given will significantly minimize on the hazards posed by capital punishment. The would-be offenders should be told that switching up their game - say, from rape to murder-will attract a much worse penalty no matter that the penalty is a life term in prison. This approach would retain the punitive impact of severe punishment with out having the offenders to engage in criminal activities to protect themselves.

Conclusion: The Complex Balance of Justice and Deterrence:
Since capital punishment increases the level of crime intensity, politicians should consider the organization and the use of criminal sanctions. It should therefore be possible to design a justice system which will punish, deter and reform without escalating violence. There is a potential strategy which can be applied to implement the above mentioned changes, One of them can be made an effort to distinguish between harsher punishments for serious crimes such as Rape and murder.

Hence the legal system should ensure that different crimes attract different punishments in order to eschew encouraging the offenders to engage in more serious criminal activities because they are already in deep water. In the same way that reforming of sentencing policies to reflect more on proportionality can make some difference in the dangers that are involved in capital punishment. The would-be offenders should be told that switching up their game - say, from rape to murder-will attract a much worse penalty no matter that the penalty is a life term in prison. It would maintain the deterrance capacity of severe punishment, and at the same time the offenders would not have to commit new crimes to avoid protection.

Award Winning Article Is Written By: Ms.Riya Suri

Authentication No: OT465741664651-17-1024