convicted murderers were released on parole and found their way back to jail for committing another murder. Opponents want the people to believe that this could not happen, when in fact it has happened. Supporters admit that the long appeal process afforded to the convicted is a problem that the deterrence view faces. They feel that capital punishment should be more immediate to be completely effective as a deterrent. With advances in DNA and Fingerprint technology, supporters also argue that the threat of innocent people being convicted is non-existent.Supporters argue that the studies done concerning deterrence are not conclusive. They claim there is no real evidence that capital punishment doesnt deter crime. As support to their theory that capital punishment does in fact deter crime, supporters point out that nations in which capital punishment had been abolished, those same nations have been known to reverse and reinstate it in their laws. A prime example of this is the United States. In 1976, the United States Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment, after laws were passed regulating its use.In conclusion if someone purposely takes a life, they should be accountable for sacrificing their own. When a crime occurs, an important function of the criminal justice system is to administer fair and just punishment. Looking back to the earlier years of United States history, criminals were tried, convicted, and executed swiftly. Deterrence worked because punishment was immediate. There was no crime epidemic back then. People feared the punishment they would face for their crimes. Today the criminal justice system is lenient on those who dont deserve leniency. Murderers in the prison system are made to feel comfortable. The problem with the criminal justice system today is the lack of fear of punishment. In fact more people die on death row than they do by actual executions. Murderers are made to feel comfortable in...
