Reading Freakonomics opened my eyes to a number of ordeals that I simply accepted in the world of today. I understood the fight for abortion, I understood that selling cocaine could land you in jail, and I understood that guns could both hurt and aid. But in chapter 4, Where Have All The Criminals Gone?, a major issue that is disputed even now a days came about. Levitt and Dubner approached the subject of the increased use of capital punishment.
A big issue in the U.S. is the constant questioning of the option of execution in states. People believed for decades that this capital punishment helped drive down crime. Citizens thought that the agent of fear of death dropped the crime rate in early 2000. But Levitt and Dubner revealed two very interesting facts that steered this belief into new territory. The first important fact would be that there were only 478 executions in the entire U.S. during the 1990's with prisoners on death row having an annual execution rate of lowly two percent. Shockingly members of the cocaine organization Black Gangster Disciple Nation has a higher percent of death at seven percent. This shows that men who are locked up for the purpose of their death have a higher percent chance of living than a man who is on a street corner in Chicago with forty dollars worth of drugs in his pockets.
The other fact revolves around the math that involves the death penalty. Levitt supplied the readers with the statistic that for every 1 criminal that is executed there are seven fewer homicides that might have been committed. Using this formula with the 2001 homicide rates it showed that execution, death penalty, only had a four percent impact on the total number of homicides that single year. This can show that the death penalty has little to any influence on the works of criminals who have homicidal or an other illegal intentions. With it costing nearly $25,000 a year to keep someone incarcerated on death row, it seems to be pointless in its purpose and long sentences.
The frightening part about this amount of information was that the threat of death doesn't stop the criminals of the United States. When it shows that a homicidal crime committed by a criminal has only a 2 percent chance of death the odds are in the criminals favor. Wasting the countries money on the criminals who are incarcerated, starts the debate of whether execution is worth it or should prisoners be sent to a regular prison. The people of the country then question if it is morally right to kill the criminal that killed another. Is this how the crime rate was lowered, with the lowering of moral? In relation I believe that the authors brought up this matter in this specific part of the book to show that execution has little effect on the country as a whole, only in the crime percentage. They don't take sides on the matter accept for the subtext that ask a question. If the fear of death is not enough, then what will it take to create such a big drop in crime the next time it peaks when abortion is already legalized?
Amanda, you raise some very interesting points about the debate over execution. When reading this chapter of Freakonomics, I was very surprised to find that the death penalty barely has any influence over the intentions of a criminal. It was very hard for me to believe that the threat of death would not cause hesitation in some criminals, and that people were willing to commit crimes at the risk of their own lives. This is very frightening to me, because it means that some people will stop at nothing to cause pain and suffering in the lives of others. I also am stumped on the questions that you have listed. It is very difficult to think about the specific question “is it morally right to kill the criminal that killed another” and I am glad that I am not the one responsible for finding that answer.
ReplyDeleteAmanda, I think criminals probably do fear death but not the "death penalty". Because our criminal justice system is so complex and the United States is so concerned with human and civil rights, the process of putting someone on death row is very lengthy. And, even when someone is on death row, with appeals and stays of execution, etc. by the time someone is executed people have forgotten or lost interest in the actual crime. I am sure many less developed countries have a much faster process. In the interest of the accused being innocent until proven guilty, this country does not rush to judgement. If a dog, or a child for that matter, is not punished for an infraction immediately, they are more likely to repeat that behavior. When it takes years and years for a proven murderer to be executed there is no tangible deterrent for other criminals. As far as morality goes, that debate could probably go on forever, an Eye for an Eye vs. Two Wrongs Don't Make a Right.
ReplyDelete