Brian Keough (i.e., the National Death Penalty Archive) from receives funding from The Council on Library and Information Resources.
A report released in 2012 by the prestigious National Research Council of the National Academies based on a review of more than three decades of research concluded that studies claiming a deterrent effect on murder rates from the death penalty are fundamentally flawed.
OVERVIEW"You can't kill someone and then go home and wash dishes.
The essence of the theory is that the threat of being executed in the future will be sufficient to cause a significant number of people to refrain from committing a heinous crime they had otherwise planned. The critical question is not whether potential criminals will be dissuaded from killing because they would face the death penalty rather than no punishment at all.
Deterrence is not principally concerned with the prevention of further killing by an already convicted death-penalty defendant. Other punishments such as life without parole might provide equal deterrence at far less costs and without the attendant risk of executing an innocent person.
A conservative former federal police officer and religious woman from the South, Lindy manages to tackle this oft-politicized topic with humor, an open mind and sincere curiosity.
In this lesson, students will have the opportunity to analyze, consider and respectfully discuss different perspectives on the death penalty by listening to Lindy's conversations with her fellow jurors, conducting independent research and reflecting on their own beliefs.
It changes you from the inside out." - Lindy Lou Wells Isonhood, Lindy Lou, Juror Number 2Upholding the rule of law is a fundamental principle of a democracy.
Doing so protects the rights of citizens, maintains order and limits the power of the government over its citizens.
More than 2,700 men and women are currently under sentence of death throughout the U.
S., although they are distributed in wildly uneven fashion.