might actually encourage those inmates sentenced to life without parole because they feel like they have nothing to lose. People that oppose the death penalty say that its not a deterrent because even thought people are aware that they could be sentenced to death for their crimes if caught, they do it anyway. They support their claims with statistics of the violent crimes committed in states that have the death penalty versus violent crimes in states that dont. The problem with their statistics is that they dont tell the whole story. Just because a state uses the death penalty, doesnt mean that they actually execute people. Comparing a state that doesnt have the death penalty to one that does have it, but doesnt actually use it isnt telling the real truth. There is no concrete evidence to prove whether or not the death penalty is a deterrent, empirical studies done by Professor Thorsten Sellin in the 1950's did not give support to either side (Scott). There are some interesting statistics though; studies have shown that the higher the rate of execution, the greater the deterrent effect. (Lester, D. "Executions As A Deterrent To Homicide", 44:562,1979a and "Deterring Effect of Executions on Murder as a Function of Number and Proportion of Executions", 45:598, 1979b, both from Psychol. Rep. and Wasserman, L.: "Non-deterrent Effect of Executions on Homicide Rates", Psychol. Rep., 58:137-138, 1981.) The State of Delaware has the highest execution rate per capita and one of the lowest homicide rates in the country (Allen). In the Furman versus Georgia case in 1972, the United States Supreme Court declared that, all death penalty statutes then in effect were unconstitutional. During the moratorium the murder rate rose 100 percent, until the Supreme Court came up with more humane ways of executing criminals (Rogers). I think that the death penalty does deter crime, but its just not carried out quickly enough. Just like in the movie...
