Effectiveness of death penalty for non-violent crimes

[PainRack]

Perhaps one can look at the example of kidnapping case?

If I recall correctly, the massive amount of kidnapping case in the 70s resulted in a death Penalty for that Crime.

Now, the cases of kidnapping has dropped to a rather low level.

There was also
1. Improved economic climate.
2. A highly successful attempt to limit arms and potential weapons.
3. Successful cracking down on gangsterism and secret societies.

Still, its reasonable that the drop in kidnapping cases and the death penalty had a correlation. As a deliberate crime, criminals could easily ponder the consequences and shift to alternate forms of blackmail and ransom for cash........

[ray245]

All the law does is keep honest people honest.

And keep those honest people happy, and at the same time, keeping destructive people away from society for a period of time.

[Tribble]

All the law does is keep honest people honest.

And keep those honest people happy, and at the same time, keeping destructive people away from society for a period of time.

What I ment was that I believe having the death penalty for non violent crimes will not be effective, as the only real impact it would have is on people who are law abiding anyways. It would make them feel safe as they think that people wouldn't risk their lives for these non violent offences. Of course in reality all it would really do is force the people who commit these crimes to be more careful in concealing them.

[ray245]

What I ment was that I believe having the death penalty for non violent crimes will not be effective, as the only real impact it would have is on people who are law abiding anyways. It would make them feel safe as they think that people wouldn't risk their lives for these non violent offences. Of course in reality all it would really do is force the people who commit these crimes to be more careful in concealing them.

Well, it can reinforce the public belief in a peaceful and secure neighbourhood. Public confidence is certainly going to help a ruling party win a local election for one thing, and it does produced a more prosperous environment.

I mean public confidence in their neighbourhood and crime rates is bound to have a correlation right?

Maybe it is a opposite effect in regards to a vicious cycle? If a poor neighbourhood is unable to attract investors due to their crime rate for example, they will continue to be a poor neighbourhood.

Whereas a public and society belief in a safe and secure environment can actually attract investors ( given that confidence is affected by peer pressure and peer influence), making that region more prosperous, and keeping less people engaged in a criminal activity.

It might be a wrong assumption for me to make.

[Master of Ossus]

It's possible that they may be more effective, but other types of punishment are more effective against this class of people, too. Very wealthy people really do not want to go to jail, and certainly not for any lengthy period of time, and so they're often more likely to take plea deals for other types of punishments than normal.