There is an ongoing debate about whether the absence of severe punishment leads to an increase in violent crime and reduces overall public safety. Some people argue that capital punishment is an essential measure for controlling violence in society. However, I partly disagree with this view, as evidence suggests that the presence of the death penalty does not necessarily reduce the number of violent crimes.
One key reason I partly disagree with this view is that capital punishment does not function as an effective deterrent to violent crime. In many cases, offenders do not consider the consequences of their actions or the possibility of being caught. In addition, if capital punishment were an efficient deterrent, violent crime rates would be significantly lower, and prisons would not remain overcrowded. By contrast, in several countries, violent crime has continued to rise despite stricter laws and harsher penalties.
Another reason capital punishment is ineffective is that violent crime is closely linked to human behaviour and psychological factors rather than rational decision-making. Violent crimes are often driven by impulsive or emotionally charged behaviour, during which rational thinking is impaired. Furthermore, at the moment violence occurs, individuals may lack psychological restrains, meaning the fear of punishment is not their primary concern. Therefore, greater emphasis should be placed on preventing violence and protecting potential victims, rather than relying solely on extreme punishments.
In conclusion, while capital punishment is often viewed as a necessary measure to control violent crime, I partly disagree that it makes society safer. This is because it fails to act as an effective deterrent and does not address the impulsive and psychological nature of violent behaviour.