The purpose of this essay is to evaluate the feasibility of the death penalty as an operational punishment. The death penalty is defined as the lawful killing of an individual as punishment. As of 2018, there were 53 countries that still have the death penalty in their legal systems and there were an estimated 690 executions in 2018. Punishments are fundamental components of any legal system, but there is no broad definition of what involves "effective" punishment. . This essay recognizes that there are a multitude of aspects to consider regarding the effectiveness of the measure and will specifically delve into three factors which are deterrence, recidivism and punishment. Harmful elements such as the risk of false convictions and a negative correlation between deterrence and homicide rates will also be discussed. This paper on the death penalty will be limited primarily to the United States and Singapore, due to their strong positions on the death penalty. The United States has a multitude of neighboring states with different opinions on the death penalty. Singapore will be scrutinized for its globally recognized approach to drug-related crime. This essay will argue that the death penalty is an effective sentence and is an operational tool in national legal systems. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The first argument in favor of the death penalty is due to the deterrence it provides to society. The National Institute of Justice (n.d.) defined deterrence as the effects of inhibiting lawbreaking from the risk of conviction. The country of Singapore will be used as an example regarding the effectiveness of the death penalty in terms of deterrence. The Singapore government has taken a firm stance against the abolition of capital punishment due to its deterrent effect, especially for drug-related crimes. The effect is evident in the low drug crime statistics in Singapore compared to other nations. The essay argues that it is reasonable to compare drug crime statistics in Singapore and the United Kingdom (UK) since Singapore's legal system was based on the UK system. Teo (2010) explained how 0.005% of Singaporeans were addicted to cannabis, which was significantly lower than the UK rate, which was 8.2%. Furthermore, fear of the death penalty caused a reduction in the number of drug users in Singapore from 3,265 in 2016 to 3,089 in 2018. This suggests that the threat of the death penalty has led to a general compliance with drug laws in Singapore and Singapore . contributes to the effectiveness of the measure. Singaporeans are also generally in favor of the death penalty for drug-related crimes, as shown by 86.9% of respondents in a survey conducted by the National University of Singapore supporting it. The strong public support for the measure perhaps reinforces the idea that citizens believe that the death penalty is a useful tool and contributes to the security of the country. The short period of time between conviction and execution in Singapore also contributed greatly to the deterrent effect as it is virtually a guaranteed outcome once the trial is over. It seems reasonable to conclude that the deterrent effect has a positive impact on some societies in dissuading potential criminals from committing crimes and can help maintain a low crime rate. However, opponents argue that there is a lack of correlation between deterrence and the death penalty and instead there is the existence of an inverse relationship. An example would be the fact that some states in the United States where the death penalty is applied have ratesof homicides compared to states without such punishment. For example, Louisiana with the death penalty had a murder rate of 12 citizens per 100,000 population compared to Illinois without the death penalty which had a murder rate of approximately 8 citizens per 100,000 population.100,000 population. This evidence suggests that the existence of the death penalty may cause more crime rather than being an effective deterrent. This may seem convincing at first glance, but it mainly applies to certain areas of the United States. Tures (2017) refutes the inverse relationship by stating that 11 of the 25 states with the lowest homicide rates in the United States have the death penalty. Furthermore, the idea that there is no correlation may be due to the fact that the death penalty is rarely used by countries and often takes a long time to implement. This somewhat undermines the argument that no correlation can be drawn between the death penalty and a deterrent effect. A further example in support of deterrence occurred in the 1970s in the United States, when there was a temporary embargo on the death penalty. This led to an instant increase in the number of murders committed and subsequently a reduction in the number of murders soon after the ban was introduced, which demonstrated that there was some merit to the death penalty in deterring criminals from committing crimes . The second aspect of death the penalty would be recidivism. It generally refers to the person's return to committing illegal actions after punishment. It can be argued that the availability of the death penalty for countries would be the most beneficial method to prevent criminals from committing serious illegal acts again. Muhlhausen (2014) expanded on this point by stating that some crimes are so heinous that death sentences should be available to remove the offender from society. This concept is supported by the high recidivism rates in areas of the United States without the death penalty, particularly New York at 42%. This is much higher than the average recidivism rate in the United States which was 37%. This suggests that the death penalty, unlike other punishments, would crucially prevent further harm from being done to society as offenders would be removed from the equation. However, critics of the recidivism thesis question this and argue that other forms of punishment are more effective in preventing offenders from committing crimes. It may be recognized that the death penalty permanently removes the offender from society, but alternative methods may allow the offender to realize his mistakes before returning to society as a law-abiding citizen. An example would be community sentences where Scottish Government research (2015) showed that 28% of offenders given community service orders re-offended compared to 53% of people given sentences to prison. This suggests that alternative sentences to the death penalty may be more effective in terms of positively influencing the offender to return to civil order. A further alternative to the death penalty would be life imprisonment, meaning that inmates would remain in prison for the rest of their lives. This completely eliminates the possibility that criminals will harm society again and extends the period over which they have to reflect on their actions. The argument, however, does not take into account the fact that other forms of punishment besides the death penalty such as life imprisonment do not comprehensively protect the citizens of the country. The individual may not be able to cause harm to the public while in prison, but has the potential to harm other prisonersor prison staff members. An example could be the prisons of New York in the United States, where the death penalty does not apply. In 2018, there were 972 cases of attacks on prison workers and 1,164 cases of assaults on prisoners, demonstrating the futility of prison sentences as a means of preventing prisoners from reoffending. This shows that other methods of punishment, such as post-sentence regulation, had little effect on their choice of recidivism and further highlights the effectiveness of punishment.the death penalty. The third aspect to compare would be the salary. Retribution constitutes the degree to which the punishment is intended to be at the same level as the crime committed and should be relatively close to the crime committed. Punishment in terms of the death penalty is quite useful as it allows closure to the victims and parties affected by the wrongdoer's actions, especially in murder cases. Closure refers to the finalization of a disturbing event for an individual. It has been argued that the death penalty allows victims and affected parties to achieve some measure of catharsis through the execution of the offender. This is supported by a survey conducted by the Washington Post (2001) according to which 60% of respondents approve of the death penalty as fair as it provides closure to the suffering of the victim's family. Similarly, Divine (2003) argued that other methods of punishment, such as fines, are presumably insignificant in terms of providing comfort to families and that placing a financial value on life would essentially diminish its value. However, one can argue the risk of the death penalty taking the lives of innocent people through false trials (BBC). Amnesty International (n.d.) took this point further by stating that 160 prisoners in the United States have been sentenced to death since the 1970s based on false convictions. This shows that even if it provides retaliation for the victims' families, there is still a latent risk that people will be unjustly executed, which is an irreversible consequence. Von Drehle (2014) supported this by stating that nearly 4% of all convictions are wrong. It can be said that as long as the justice system in countries is not infallible, the danger of wrongfully convicting and executing innocent people would remain in society. Although this position is popular, it is not supported by significant evidence as it can be said that in modern society the wrongful termination of life is a remote possibility. This is supported by the number of individuals in the United States who have been acquitted of their crimes after an appeal to the courts. According to the Innocence Project (n.d.), a total of 365 people have been exonerated in the United States since the 1990s. This evidence illustrates the stronger and more robust appeal systems that many countries have in their legal systems that can prevent any incidents of false convictions leading to wrongful deaths. As a result, the effectiveness of the death penalty can be seen from the overall retributive effect, and the argument of false convictions is denied to a certain extent by the countries' durable legal systems. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper now from our expert writers. Get a Custom Essay This essay attempted to evaluate three segments of the death penalty: deterrence, recidivism, and punishment. The Singapore example demonstrates the effectiveness of the death penalty in strongly deterring drug crime, and the high recidivism rates in some areas of the United States show that other forms of punishment are necessarily successful in reducing recidivism. The essay also presents that the closure that the death penalty provides intowards the victims translates into the most appropriate form of punishment to satisfy them. The essay acknowledges the existence of adverse opinions regarding the death penalty, but argues that overall the positive aspects of the death penalty far outweigh the negative ones. This essay concludes by stating that the death penalty is a compelling instrument of punishment in any nation's legal system. Reference List Agenyi, J (2017) Recidivism in the United States- An Overview [Online]. Available at https://atlascorps.org/fellows/ [Accessed 2 May 2019].Amnesty International (2019) Death penalty in 2018: facts and figures [Online]. Available at https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/04/death-penalty-facts-and-figures-2018/ [Accessed 22 April 2019].Amnesty International (n.d.) Death penalty [Online ]. Available at https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/death-penalty/ [accessed 4 May 2019]. Amnesty International (n.d.) The Death Penalty and Deterrence [Online]. Available at https://www.amnestyusa.org/issues/death-penalty/death-penalty-facts/the-death-penalty-and-deterrence/ [Accessed 30 April 2019].BBC (n.d.) Arguments for capital Punishment [online]. Available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/capitalpunishment/for_1.shtml [accessed 2 May 2019].Blecker, R (2014) Death Penalty Proponent [Online]. Available at https://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=002000#4 [Accessed May 4, 2019].Bureau of Justice Statistics (2018) 5 out of 6 state prisoners arrested within 9 years of their Release [Online]. Available at https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/18upr9yfup0514pr.cfm [Accessed May 2, 2019].Death Penalty Information Center (n.d.) Deterrence: States without the death penalty have had consistently higher murder rates bass [Online]. Available at https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates [accessed April 29, 2019]. Devine, R. A. (2003) Should the Death Penalty be used for punishment? [Online]. Available at https://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001004&print=true [accessed 5 May 2019].Dobson, J (2016) Does the death penalty deter crime? [Online]. Available at https://www.amnestyusa.org/issues/death-penalty/death-penalty-facts/the-death-penalty-and-deterrence/ [Accessed 1 May 2019].Edward, S (2018) 3 alternatives to The death penalty [online]. Available at http://www.antideathpenalty.org/death-penalty/alternatives-to-death-penalty [accessed 4 May 2019].Fluery-Steiner and Kleinstuber (2015) International Encyclopaedia of the Social & Behavioral Science. Elsevier.Girelli, G (2019) The death penalty for drug crimes: global overview 2018 [Online]. Harm Reduction International. Available at https://www.hri.global/files/2019/02/22/HRI_DeathPenaltyReport_2019.pdf [accessed 26 April 2019].Hodgkinson, P and Rutherford, A (1996) Capital Punishment Global Issues and Prospects. Waterside PressHood, R, G (2008) The death penalty: a global perspective [Online]. Oxford Online Scholarship. Available at: https://www-oxfordscholarship-com.ezproxy.nottingham.ac.uk/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199228478.001.0001/acprof-9780199228478 [Accessed 8 May 2019]Hood, R, G (2004) The death penalty: beyond abolition. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Innocence Project (n.d.) DNA exemptions in the United States [Online]. Available at https://www.innocenceproject.org/dna-exonerations-in-the-united-states/ [Accessed 7 May 2019].Scherdin, L (2014) Capital Punishment- A Hazard to a Sustainable Justice System?. Ashgate Publishing Limited.Madeira, J (2016) Capital punishment, closure and media. Oxford Research Encyclopaedias.Mulhlhausen, DB (2014) Capital punishment works: it deters crime [Online]. Available on 2019] .