However, once there is a law in place, which may impose a cost, the individuals who may consider breaking the law will also have to consider the personal cost which may be extracted; creating the deterrent (Devlin, 1965). However, for that law to be a deterrent the individual must perceive the cost to be one that they will have to pay (Devlin, 1965).
It may be argued that the death sentence; which is the ultimate price that any criminal may pay for their crime, should be a deterrent. However, it is unlikely that any law will act as a deterrent unless it is seen to operate effectively. If a law is not seen to be enforced, or those who may be subject to the punishment laid down by a law, do not believe they will be caught or it will be enforced, the potential for deterrent may be reduced. By televising the executions there is the potential to increase transparency...
The problem which may be faced when assessing whether or not this would be a deterrent is the lack of supporting evidence that the death stance itself is a deterrent.
One of the first studies which examined the role of the death sentence as a deterrent for the
crime of homicide was by Sellin (1959), who examined the homicide rates in states which imposed the death penalty against states where it had been abolished. The result of the research indicated that there was no difference and the
conclusion was the presence of the death sentence was not a deterrent (Sellin, 1959). In a different study
