erefore, the threat of capital punishment will influence criminals to refrain from committing crimes. Unfortunately, this assumption is incorrect. Starting with the simplest of statistics, if capital punishment reliably prevented murder, countries with capital punishment should generally have a lower murder rate then countries without. However, this does not occur (Capital). The homicide rate in Canada has gradually been dropping since executions were stopped. This has also been seemed to be true in many other countries that have abandoned the death penalty (Robinson). As of in the United States, states that use the death penalty tend to have higher number of homicides than states that do not use it. Some statistics written in The Fence say that while there has been a nationwide increase in the number of executions, there has not been much of a change in murder rates. The murder rate was 8.8 in 1976, when the death penalty was made legal. From 1976-1995, the murder rate has fluctuated between 7 and 10. In 1995 there were fifty-six executions and the murder rate was at 8, which is where it started in 1976. This little bit of a change means that there is very little deterrence (Mullen).One of the most dominant arguments against capital punishment involves the obvious risk of executing an innocent person. It seems the most serious concern for Americans involves the possibility of an innocent person compelled into a plea bargain by the threat of a capital prosecution. No jurisdiction enforcing a death sentence can avoid the possibility of an innocent person wrongly accused, convicted, or executed. The real question is not whether the use of capital punishment will result in the execution of an innocent person, but when and how often. Few people argue the basic facts, and almost everyone agrees the courts have convicted innocent people in error. In the United States, American courts have released sixty-nine people sentenced t...
