Death Penalty in America, Legal Studies 485, Spring 2003

Class discussion questions, Februry 20, 2003 (Deterrence)

1. What is deterrence? (p. 127) What are some of the factors that must be present for a punishment to be a deterrent? Think about this in relationship to yourself. What stops (and what doesn’t stop) you from doing something you know is wrong?

2. What is the difference between deterrence and incapacitation? (P. 128)

3. Bedau argues that “abolitionists might as well concede that, indeed, the death penalty probably does deter someone, sometime, somewhere—just as retentionists must concede that the thousands of criminal homicices…prove the death penalty is at best a far cry from a perfect deterrent.” Whay does he say this? What does he say is the relevant question? (P. 129)

4. Chapter 9 is a review of studies on the deterrent effect of capital punishment going back to the 1930s. Go through their analysis; be sure to discuss the Ehrlich study (p. 141), the issue of celerity (p. 143-144), the brutalization effect (p. 144-146), and police killings (p. 150-152). According to the authors, does the empirical evidence support the argument that the death penalty is a more effective deterrent to murder than life imprisonment? Explain. Be very specific. Do you agree or disagree with their conclusions? Explain. Be specific.

5. Some retentionists argue that the death penalty is not a deterrent because it is not carried out enough. If we use Bedau’s figure of 22,000 criminal homicides each year, how many of those murderers would have to be executed for the death penalty to be a deterrent?

6. Do you think that televising executions would be a deterrent? Explain.

Return to homepage