Death Penalty has a Supreme Boost Influence than Incarceration in Australia - Research Proposal Example

RUNNING HEAD: RESEARCH PROPOSAL Does capital punishment have a higher support and higher perceived crime deterrence impact than incarceration among Australian college students? Name: Course: Institution: Instructor: Date: Introduction The number of prisoners occupying the Australian prison systems is on an upward trend. As of June 30 2012, the ABS Director of the National Centre for Crime and Justice Statistics reports that there were 168 prisoners per 100,000 adults. This translates to 29,383 behind bars for various crimes. The population of females behind bars is relatively low at 7% of the total though the numbers have been growing at a faster rate of 48% since 2002 compared to males at 29%. The median age was 33.9 years for males and 34.6 years for females which represents a prime age of economic productivity. This pinpoints to a higher economic loss for the country and society as a whole. Of all the prisoners, over 27% were from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Only 20% of the prisoners were born outside Australia with a majority of them being illegal immigrants. The Northern Territory had the premier imprisonment rate compared to other states with 826 per 100,000 followed by Western Australia with 267 per 100,000. The most common offences for males was intention to cause harm or injury (17%), sexual offences (15%) while for females possession of illicit drugs was most common at 17% followed by intention to cause harm or injury at 14%. Only 10% were imprisoned for homicide charges. Of all the total inmates, 55% were repeat offenders who had served time in jail previously. For those incarcerated between June 30th 2012 and June 30th 2011, 60% of them have served time in adult prison in the past. What this means is that the number of repeat offenders is growing (ABS 2012). Incarceration as a form of punishment to offenders is meant to reform and transform convicted offenders. These offenders are released back into society in the belief that they are no longer motivated to commit crime for fear of incarceration. Sentences are not only supposed to reform offenders but are also meant to discourage potential offenders. Harrison (2009) reports an interesting statistic in Australia prison systems. The state of Victoria has recorded the second lowest prison population after South Australia. In Victoria also, the population of foreign born prisoners is higher than the national average at 25%. The percentage of repeat offenders in Victoria is also lower compared to the national average of 55%. Although the number of prisoners continues to grow nationally including Victoria, the number of repeat offenders remains lower and so does the growth in prison population compared to the rest of the country. This could be due to the longer average sentences on in Victoria. Although capital punishment is not allowed in Australia, it is obvious from the statistics from Victoria that stiffer penalties have increased orderliness and deterred repeat offenders and even other potential criminals. The most severe punishment is viewed as the death penalty. Some scholars argue that the stiffer the penalty the higher the deterrence impact. There have been countless arguments in support or in opposition of the death penalty in Australia and around the world. The government spends huge amounts of taxpayers’ money to run the prison system. If the system is not effective, it is high time that the government introduced stricter sentences with a higher deterrence impact. One of the options is the reinstatement of capital punishment. Empirical studies have questioned the effectiveness of punishment, whether incarceration or capital punishment in deterring crime. Carlsmith, Darley and Robinson (2002) queried the motivation behind the modern society’s preference for punishment as a way of deterring crime from a psychological point of view. One of the reasons that the society brings out as the reason why punishment is preferred is to restore scales of social justice which are interfered with when an individual commits a crime. This kind of punishment does not hold any deterrence impact as it is an end to itself. Immanuel Kant supported this view by writing that ‘“punishment can never be administered merely as a means for promoting another good” and should be “pronounced over all criminals proportionate to their internal wickedness”’ (Carlsmith, Darley and Robinson 2002, p. 284). The second motivation for punishment is to prevention of future harm to ensure social harmony. This is well supported by utilitarianism. In essence, Carlsmith, Darley and Robinson (2002) do not attribute the decreased imprisonment levels in Victoria to the increasingly stiffer penalties. Problem statement Recent data on the population of Australian prisons shows that the number of convicted offenders is growing by the day. Incarceration as a form of punishment to offenders is meant to reform and transform convicted offenders. Sentences are not only supposed to reform offenders but are also meant to discourage potential offenders, in capacitate the incarcerated and discourage them from repeating such crimes. However, this is not the case as the number of repeat offenders continues to grow. The fact that the states with stiffer penalties record lesser imprisonments brings to question the issue of capital punishment. If severe punishments have more impact than lenient punishment, would that mean that the most severe statement would have the greatest deterrence impact? There are positives to look at when considering whether capital punishment is appropriate. The government spends huge amounts of taxpayers’ money to run the prison system. If the system is not effective, it is high time that the government introduced stricter sentences with a higher deterrence impact. With the mean average age of prisoners being around 33 years, young people must given an opportunity to express their views. This research thus seeks to find out whether capital punishment has a higher support and higher perceived crime deterrence impact than incarceration among Australian college students. Aims The research seeks to find out whether capital punishment has a higher crime deterrence impact than incarceration. The research will thus seek to collect both primary and secondary data which will enable the researcher to respond to the question and make informed conclusions and recommendations. Specific objectives 1. To find out whether the threat of incarceration demotivate students from engaging in criminal behaviour 2. To find out the most feared repercussions for criminal behaviour? 3. To find out the students view on morality of death penalty? 4. Identifying potential alternatives to incarceration Literature review Past studies on public opinions on the death penalty have been conducted with mixed views. A preliminary study by Khondaker, Lambert and Jiang (2011) among a sample of Bangladeshi university students on their views on capital punishment gave interesting results. The study showed that 58% believed that capital crimes should be punishable by death penalty. The study used a convenient sample of 258 students where 66% of them were in total support of death penalty, 25% opposed it and 8% were uncertain. The researchers acknowledged the variation in the degree of support or opposition to death penalty. As search, a seven point Likert response Scale ranging from ‘strongly agree’ to ‘strongly disagree’ was used. For the support of death penalty, the aspects measured were retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and social order. For opposition to death penalty, the aspects measured were morality, brutalization, life without parole (LWOP) and innocence. A similar study by Lambert, Clarke and Lambert involving a convenient sample of 730 college students at a Midwestern university in the US investigated the major reasons for support or rejection of death penalty. From the results, 62% support the death penalty, 12% are uncertain, and 26% oppose it. Emotional retribution, emotional opposition, morality, and law and order were the four main reasons that shaped opinion on death penalty. Therefore, these are key variables in the current research which are likely to vary with respondents’ religious and cultural backgrounds. Another study by Falcao and Freiburger (2011) in the US relied on focus groups to investigate the main reasons that were critical in supporting or opposing death penalty. Six focus groups were conducted with a total of 20 participants. The study results indicated that there was general majority support for the death penalty. However, the simple opinion of being a supporter or opponents of death penalty did not capture the intricate details critical is forming opinion. The researchers found out that offender and offense characteristics greatly shaped opinion and swayed the views of participants on the subject. Rationale From past studies, it is not clear to what degree the severity of a punishment deters crime among students. This is due to the fact that the existing literature both the supporting as well as opposing gives valid justifications on the topic. Therefore, the researcher shall aim at investigating the level of support of capital punishment among students. This is in light of the fact that youth and young adults comprise a larger percentage of offenders. Furthermore, with potential careers as policy makers in the criminal justice system, their opinion matters. This researcher will give the respondent adequate information regarding the research topic to enhance his or her understanding. As a result he will be able to deduce a conclusion and make desired recommendations. Limitations of the study The researcher expects to encounter the following limitations when carrying out the project. Confidentiality It may be difficult to obtain some information from students for fear on how the information will be used. Suspicion Some of the respondents may be suspicious of the intentions of the researcher. Furthermore, some respondents hesitate to participate in the study because of fear of being reprimanded for revealing information to the researcher. Scope of the study The topic is wide and requires a large scale research to understand the topic well. With such a narrow w scope in terms of sample size and questions posed to respondents, the findings are not reliable. Methodology Research paradigm The research will be based on an interpretive paradigm. This is because the responses from the participants in the research will be based on their experiences with the justice system, crime and the life in Australia. Their expected responses are based on how they interpret the issue of capital punishment and incarceration. Data collection The research will utilize both primary and secondary data. The research will collect primary quantitative data from a simple random sample from fellow students of XYZ University. Simple questionnaires with closed questions will be used. To save time, the researcher will read out questions to respondents and tick the appropriate box. Closed questions will enable the research to remain within scope and allow for consistent data. Secondary data will be collected from Australia Bureau of Statistics and any other relevant data that provides trends in the rate of imprisonment prior to abolition of capital punishment in 1973 and afterwards. Sampling The researcher will randomly choose respondents from various locations within the campus. A sample of twenty respondents will be targeted. The sample must attain gender and ethnic balance. All the respondents shall be picked within the university grounds from random halls and courses. Procedure The research will take place within the space of one week. The research will take place after classes where majority of students are relaxed and have ample time to answer questionnaires. The researcher will plan for two days to primary collect data from the field. The researcher will identify respondents and explain to them the purpose of the current research. Thereafter, the researcher shall seek the consent of the respondent to participate in the research and fill out the questionnaire. Data analysis and presentation Outstanding themes will be collected from questionnaires in the opened ended questions in the questionnaires. For the closed questions, the responses will be tallied into tables and basic statistical tests such as mean and mode will be calculated using excel. Further analysis using correlation analysis will be conducted where applicable. For easy interpretation and understanding, the data will be represented in diagrams such as pie charts and graphs. Secondary data gathered on crime trends will be presented in graphs and will be contrasted to the current figures. Ethical issues Given the political sensitivity of the matter, respondents identity should be withheld (Firebaugh, 2008). Furthermore, the respondents will not be required to give out their personal information that will reveal their identity. Other ethical issues in social research may include breach of confidentiality, misleading the participants regarding the aim of the research, invasion of privacy, psychological difficulties which may affect the participants, and collective risks (Firebaugh, 2008). All of these ethical issues are pertinent in the current research. References ABS (2012). Prisoners in Australia. Retrieved online from, http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/4517.0 Arthur, J. (2004). Morality and moral controversies: readings in moral, social, and political philosophy. Sydney: Prentice Hall. Byrant, C. D. (2003). Handbook of death and dying. New York: Sage. Falcao, D. & Freiburger, T. (2011). Public opinion and the death penalty: a qualitative approach. The Qualitative Report, 16 (3), 830-847. Firebaugh, G, 2008, Seven Rules for Social Research, Princeton University Press. Galliher, J., Koch, L., Keys, D. & Guess, T. 2005. America without the death penalty: states leading the way. New York: UPNE. Gerber, R. & Johnson, J. (2007). The top ten death penalty myths: the politics of crime control. London: Greenwood Publishing Group. Gresham, G. P. (2005). Death penalty on trial: a handbook with cases, laws, and documents. New York: ABC-CLIO. Grix, J. 2004. The foundations of research. London, Palgrave Macmillan. Harrison, C. (2009).. Prison population rises by 1700 in a year. Retrieved online from, http://www.theage.com.au/national/prison-population-rises-by-1700-in-a-year-20091213-kqig.html Khondaker, M., Lambert, E. & Jiang, S. (2011). Death penalty views in Bangladesh: an exploratory study of capital punishment views among Bangladeshi college students. International journal of comparative and applied criminal justice. 35(2), 123-140. Lambert, E. G., Clarke, A. & Lambert, J. (2004). Reasons for Supporting and Opposing Capital Punishment in the USA: A Preliminary Study. Internet Journal of Criminology,1-34. Retrieved online from, www.internetjournalofcriminology.com Read More