Should Capital Punishment Be Abolished And Its More Modern Version Known As Rational Choice Theory?

1179 Words null Page
1. Using the main assumptions of Classical Criminology and or its more modern version known as Rational Choice Theory, what do you think are the most significant arguments for and against capital punishment?

As part of this Forum Question, and after considering both sides, should capital punishment be abolished and or retained...and specifically why?

The main assumptions of Rational Choice Theory are individualism, understanding, rationality, consequentialism, egoism, and maximization (Boudon 2003). With respect to criminology the assumptions are that an individual will make a rational decision to commit a crime, and part of that decision will be assessing whether or not the potential cost of the punishment is worth the benefit of committing a crime (Quackenbush 2004). In my opinion, using the assumptions of Rationale Choice Theory the most compelling argument to continue to utilize capital punishment would be that when an individual considering committing a crime is weighing the benefits of the crime to potentially death as a consequence, then many crimes should not be committed. The high toll of the punishment should prevent many crimes from happening just from the possibility of being put to death for committing a crime. According to the Rational Choice Theory if death was the punishment for every crime, society would be close to crime free. Today, when driving down the highway, many people determine that the one hundred dollar fine associated with the exceeding the…

Related Documents