Countries who droped penal death have seen the number of terrible crimes reducing. I don’t think there is a single example where their number have grown. There are hypothesis to explain it.
Also, the only way to prevent a large abuse of penal death is to keep convicted offenders in jail for a long time before their execution ; which negate the economical argument. It was not acceptable on a moral point of view, but it is not even cheaper.
Something costy and not efficient should be replaced by something cheaper and more efficient. Especially when the second is better on a moral point of view.
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 1 week ago
countries who dropped penal death convictions are more likely to have early intervention programs because their government is focused on social benefits over corporate profits.
just because they have banned death penalties does not mean that it reduced “terrible crimes”.
peacepath@lemmy.world 1 week ago
You are right that nothing proves that droping penal death reduces the crimes. There could be no link between both, it could be a pure coincidence happening in the hundred countries droping it.
Also, and despite a constant populist pressure in each of this countries, very few have reintroduced it (and most of them fastly droped it back again).
Of course, some may have droped it out of diplomatic pressure more than for their population… but still, it brings benefices. Sorry, I mean the coincidental effect on crimes is observed ; and so at the very least droping penal death does not rise the numbers nor severity of crimes.