Capital punishment not an effective deterrent, say experts

[rooster59]

Capital punishment not an effective deterrent, say experts

By THE SUNDAY NATION

 

 File photo
 
WITH increasing public concern regarding repeat criminal offenders, critics and experts have been divided as to what approach would deter former convicts from committing crimes again after being released from jail.
 
Many public members – often angry with perpetrators of high-profile crimes including rape-murder or mass killing – have called for execution of convicted offenders, instead of life imprisonment or lengthy jail sentences. 
 
However, there is a consensus among experts in criminology and the justice system that harsh penalties like life imprisonment and capital punishment have been proven ineffective at deterring repeat crimes, a recent seminar heard.
 
The seminar, entitled “The role of probation in tackling the problem of repeat criminal offences”, was organised by the Department of Probation earlier this month.
 
Law professor Prathan Watanavanich, an expert in criminology and justice procedures, citing findings of a research study, said that imprisonment was not an effective deterrent to prevent crimes. 
 
Severe penalties had “only a little deterring effect” on criminals, Prathan noted. 
“Also, there has been no proof that capital punishment can deter prospective perpetrators of murders,” Prathan said, citing statistics collected over the past five decades.
 
He said the study found that the certainty of getting arrested was “very effective” in deterring people from committing crimes.
 
“The certainty of getting arrested is a deterrent that is even more powerful than getting punished,” the law professor concluded.
 
Prathan said this finding could be applied to a current problem: Many convicts on probation or parole have not been punished for breaking the conditions of their early release. The problem, he said, is parole officers have no power to arrest people for breaking parole conditions.
The expert suggested that parole officers should be empowered to make arrests in such cases.
 
“Importantly, we need to make people know that they will get arrested for committing offences, and they will be rearrested for breaking the conditions for their early release,” Prathan said.
 
“If that can be put into practice, we will see a decline in repeat crime offenders.”
 
Public Prosecutor Uthai Athivej said the idea of getting rid of repeat crime offenders from society was “too harsh”, and that in practice capital punishment had been unable to deter repeat offences.
 
Judge Supakit Yaempracha suggested that criminal offenders should be properly classified and dealt with, both while they served their time in jail and after their release. This approach should help prevent repeat crimes, he said.
 
Central Investigation Bureau commander Pol Lt-General Thitiraj Nongharnpitak said Thailand has no effective measures to prevent former convicts from committing crimes again.
 
“Over the past three years, about 300,000 inmates have been released – some 7,000 of them sex-related offenders. Thai society still has no effective measures to monitor this group of people,” he said.
 
The police officer suggested a system to screen convicts before their release so that authorities could determine who should be monitored for possible repeat offences.
 
Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30323647

 

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-08-13

[BasalBanality]

Singapore is an example where capital punishment is effective as a deterrent. 

[Ahab]

Complete rubbish. The death penalty is an extremely effective deterrent (100%) for repeat crimes from the person that is executed. Life in prison also prevents that person from committing crimes (except against other prisoners) for the rest of their life. 

[steven100]

7 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Complete rubbish. The death penalty is an extremely effective deterrent (100%) for repeat crimes from the person that is executed. Life in prison also prevents that person from committing crimes (except against other prisoners) for the rest of their life. 

totally agree ....  and if used in other countries for drug sellers, pushers and traffickers they wouldn't be in such a mess.

[Moonmoon]

if Death Penalty is an effective deterrent then there shouldn't be any crimes committed at all for that particular punishment.

 

Don't get me wrong, I would sure want to bash the head in for any rapist murderer but would leave that to the justice system but would that really stop the crime?

 

More has to be done to educate and prevent crimes like this from happening. 

[Moonmoon]

44 minutes ago, BasalBanality said:

Singapore is an example where capital punishment is effective as a deterrent. 

 

24 minutes ago, steven100 said:

totally agree ....  and if used in other countries for drug sellers, pushers and traffickers they wouldn't be in such a mess.

 

34 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Complete rubbish. The death penalty is an extremely effective deterrent (100%) for repeat crimes from the person that is executed. Life in prison also prevents that person from committing crimes (except against other prisoners) for the rest of their life. 

really?

 

Singapore just executed a Malaysian Man based on circumstantial evidence for drug trafficking. 

If capital punishment is reserved for a certain crime. Wouldn't it be the utmost importance for all the evidence to be without a doubt before the sentence is mete out? 

If there is some evidence to suggest otherwise, I would prefer a life or lengthy sentence for drug offences just in case the justice system does not kill someone wrongly. 

 

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/07/malaysian-executed-for-drugs-conviction-in-singapore-after-unfair-trial-a-shocking-violation-of-the-human-right-to-life/

 

if death penalty is 100% effective, then why are there still Drug abusers and Drug traffickers in Singapore? I thought its supposed to be 100% ? 

Edited August 12, 2017 by Moonmoon
missed 1 last point.

[Ahab]

11 minutes ago, Moonmoon said:

if Death Penalty is an effective deterrent then there shouldn't be any crimes committed at all for that particular punishment.

 

Don't get me wrong, I would sure want to bash the head in for any rapist murderer but would leave that to the justice system but would that really stop the crime?

 

More has to be done to educate and prevent crimes like this from happening. 

Using this logic all laws are ineffective because they do not effectively prevent crimes? Let us take that a step further and maybe we should get rid of all the laws that do not provide a 100% deterrent (which is all of them).  The criminal justice system is about punishment and bashing in the head of a rapist/murderer provides punishment and prevents that person from ever hurting another human being ever. 100% effective., 100% of the time

[Ahab]

7 minutes ago, Moonmoon said:

 

 

really?

 

Singapore just executed a Malaysian Man based on circumstantial evidence for drug trafficking. 

If capital punishment is reserved for a certain crime. Wouldn't it be the utmost importance for all the evidence to be without a doubt before the sentence is mete out? 

If there is some evidence to suggest otherwise, I would prefer a life or lengthy sentence for drug offences just in case the justice system does not kill someone wrongly. 

 

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/07/malaysian-executed-for-drugs-conviction-in-singapore-after-unfair-trial-a-shocking-violation-of-the-human-right-to-life/

 

if death penalty is 100% effective, then why are there still Drug abusers and Drug traffickers in Singapore? I thought its supposed to be 100% ? 

The death penalty in Singapore is 100 % effective at deterring repeat offenders. Since when did a law have to be 100 % effective at deterring the crime to be effective. Does this means that all laws currently on the books are ineffective and should be repealed? Of course not! It is a strawman argument reserved only for the death penalty.

[Moonmoon]

3 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Using this logic all laws are ineffective because they do not effectively prevent crimes? Let us take that a step further and maybe we should get rid of all the laws that do not provide a 100% deterrent (which is all of them).  The criminal justice system is about punishment and bashing in the head of a rapist/murderer provides punishment and prevents that person from ever hurting another human being ever. 100% effective., 100% of the time

and your logic of a 100% is flawed as well. there is no 100% becos facts and statistics say so. 

I did not say get rid of laws, I said the Laws have to be practiced and proved in court with the utmost respect in accordance to the crime committed because it is capital punishment and human lives we are talking about. 

I have am Human I have feel anger too when I see someone else gets hurt and I do feel the need for the worst punishment for crimes like that against Humanity, but I am just pointing out for fairness and not for abuse of Laws.  

Keep dreaming of your 100% perfect world becos there is no such thing. 

[Moonmoon]

4 minutes ago, Ahab said:

The death penalty in Singapore is 100 % effective at deterring repeat offenders. Since when did a law have to be 100 % effective at deterring the crime to be effective. Does this means that all laws currently on the books are ineffective and should be repealed? Of course not! It is a strawman argument reserved only for the death penalty.

SHow me the stats for a fact that it is 100%?

these traffickers and drug abusers might already have committed the crimes a few times before they are caught. 

And the the drug kingpins who sent the drug mules into Singapore to die are still committing the same crime regardless of the death penalty. 

So there is no 100% like you claim. Unless you can show me Singapore is Drug free then no 100%.

You can argue all you want, but the Drug Crimes Statistics are a fact in Singapore. 

Edited August 12, 2017 by Moonmoon
correct spelling.

[Moonmoon]

6 minutes ago, Ahab said:

The death penalty in Singapore is 100 % effective at deterring repeat offenders. Since when did a law have to be 100 % effective at deterring the crime to be effective. Does this means that all laws currently on the books are ineffective and should be repealed? Of course not! It is a strawman argument reserved only for the death penalty.

So much for your 100%

Facts and Stats from Central Narcotics Bureau Singapore. 

 

https://www.cnb.gov.sg/drugsituationreport/drugsituationreport2016.aspx

 

If you say its 100% then please show me a report from CNB singapore that its completely 100% free.

[BasalBanality]

16 minutes ago, Moonmoon said:

 

 

really?

 

Singapore just executed a Malaysian Man based on circumstantial evidence for drug trafficking. 

If capital punishment is reserved for a certain crime. Wouldn't it be the utmost importance for all the evidence to be without a doubt before the sentence is mete out? 

If there is some evidence to suggest otherwise, I would prefer a life or lengthy sentence for drug offences just in case the justice system does not kill someone wrongly. 

 

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/07/malaysian-executed-for-drugs-conviction-in-singapore-after-unfair-trial-a-shocking-violation-of-the-human-right-to-life/

 

if death penalty is 100% effective, then why are there still Drug abusers and Drug traffickers in Singapore? I thought its supposed to be 100% ? 

As far as deterrence is concerned, the current state of affairs in Singapore is prove.

 

I'm curious to what legislations in any jurisdiction that are of 100% effectiveness, short of cleaning the gene pool?

[Moonmoon]

11 minutes ago, Ahab said:

The death penalty in Singapore is 100 % effective at deterring repeat offenders. Since when did a law have to be 100 % effective at deterring the crime to be effective. Does this means that all laws currently on the books are ineffective and should be repealed? Of course not! It is a strawman argument reserved only for the death penalty.

And I quote you again. 

 

12 minutes ago, Ahab said:

The death penalty in Singapore is 100 % effective at deterring repeat offenders. Since when did a law have to be 100 % effective at deterring the crime to be effective.

What are you on??? 

100% effective at deterring repeat offenders but does not have to be 100% effective at crime? 

you are contradicting yourself 100% 

[Moonmoon]

2 minutes ago, BasalBanality said:

As far as deterrence is concerned, the current state of affairs in Singapore is prove.

 

I'm curious to what legislations in any jurisdiction that are of 100% effectiveness, short of cleaning the gene pool?

it is effective in keeping the drug crimes low, but I wouldn't go to the extent of saying its a 100% thats all.

[BasalBanality]

2 minutes ago, Moonmoon said:

it is effective in keeping the drug crimes low, but I wouldn't go to the extent of saying its a 100% thats all.

Which if any of my comments thus far suggested that the death penalty or capital punishment is 100% effective?

[rodney earl]

What a load of rubbish. It is certainly an effective deterrent for some as they can only get the chance to do a crime ONCE. 

[Ahab]

No law prevents crime, if they did then all you would have to do is pass a law and the crime would go away. The death penalty will prevent one person from ever committing a crime again, 100% of the time.

 

[ezzra]

1 hour ago, rooster59 said:

However, there is a consensus among experts in criminology and the justice system that harsh penalties like life imprisonment and capital punishment have been proven ineffective at deterring repeat crimes, a recent seminar heard.

 

There's an idea, try to house those murders, rapist and other hard criminal

career in a 5 star hotel with all the trapping and luxury they wish, maybe that

will teach them a lesson and make them all go pious and holly like peopel....

[Ahab]

7 minutes ago, Moonmoon said:

And I quote you again. 

 

What are you on??? 

100% effective at deterring repeat offenders but does not have to be 100% effective at crime? 

you are contradicting yourself 100% 

If the offender is executed, he will not commit another crime. The chance of him ever becoming a repeat offender after he is executed is extremely low. he death penalty is 100% effective for deterring repeat offenders (after they are executed).

 

No law is 100% effective at deterring any crime, to suggest that as a possibility or a requirement for a law to be valid or effective seems non-realistic. 

[Moonmoon]

5 minutes ago, BasalBanality said:

Which if any of my comments thus far suggested that the death penalty or capital punishment is 100% effective?

I didn't say you did. I agreed with you on the effectiveness part. 

[Moonmoon]

1 minute ago, Ahab said:

If the offender is executed, he will not commit another crime. The chance of him ever becoming a repeat offender after he is executed is extremely low. he death penalty is 100% effective for deterring repeat offenders (after they are executed).

 

No law is 100% effective at deterring any crime, to suggest that as a possibility or a requirement for a law to be valid or effective seems non-realistic. 

Thank You. :)

[Thaiwrath]

1 hour ago, Moonmoon said:

if Death Penalty is an effective deterrent then there shouldn't be any crimes committed at all for that particular punishment.

 

Don't get me wrong, I would sure want to bash the head in for any rapist murderer but would leave that to the justice system but would that really stop the crime?

 

More has to be done to educate and prevent crimes like this from happening. 

Try educating a meth head with no future prospects !

Good luck with that, yet a young child he rapes has their life ruined.

[JAG]

No law prevents crime, if they did then all you would have to do is pass a law and the crime would go away. The death penalty will prevent one person from ever committing a crime again, 100% of the time.
 

What's more, as referenced by "moonmon" in post # 6 it has the advantage of ensuring that someone who might have committed a crime (circumstantial evidence pointing that way) from possibly committing that crime again...

[Orton Rd]

All child abusers should get the death penalty

[edwinchester]

The death penalty stops  convicted offenders reoffending, it is not a deterrent.

[hansnl]

3 hours ago, Ahab said:

Complete rubbish. The death penalty is an extremely effective deterrent (100%) for repeat crimes from the person that is executed. Life in prison also prevents that person from committing crimes (except against other prisoners) for the rest of their life. 

The "kill-kill-kill-kill" will be out in force today.

When will the light be switched on for the death brigade so that they can see that the state endorsed killing is not a deterrent, at all.

Don't they understand that by uttering those death curses they lower themselves to the barbaric ISIS level?

Lifelong prison sentences are a deterrent, give a nice revenge feeling, and if the convicted in a later stadium is found to be innocent, can be released.

If executed, and found not guilty later, then the executing was just murder.

What then, trial of judge, jury, prosecutor, police?

In short, killing is never an answer!

 

[worgeordie]

Deterrent or not, it's the perfect solution for some of the horrendous murders,

committed by evil people,child killers,rapists ,premeditated murderers ,the death

penalty has to be enforced.

regards worgeordie

[BasalBanality]

27 minutes ago, hansnl said:

Lifelong prison sentences are a deterrent, give a nice revenge feeling, and if the convicted in a later stadium is found to be innocent, can be released.

And what of the cost of keeping these individuals incarcerated under long or life sentences? 

 

America's mass incarceration is an example of systemic failure of the penal system and the golden geese of a Prisons Industrial Complex.

Edited August 13, 2017 by BasalBanality

[Yinglove]

8 minutes ago, worgeordie said:

Deterrent or not, it's the perfect solution for some of the horrendous murders,

committed by evil people,child killers,rapists ,premeditated murderers ,the death

penalty has to be enforced.

regards worgeordie

How perfect is it for the wrongly convicted?

 

When a bit of sunlight is finally shone on the case of the 2 Burmese lads falsely convicted of the Koh Toa murders what can the state do?

 

If they are alive, they can release them and compensate with a decent sized payout.

If they have been executed??????

 

Edited August 13, 2017 by Yinglove

[shady86]

Paying with own life for taking someone's life is the only way to move forward. The safest countries in the world have capital punishment for drugsand murders.