The majority of society is for the reassurance of safety and for prosecuting murderers extensively and to the fullest in which the law provides. In a 2003 gallop poll, a nationwide survey, a majority of 74 percent surveyed gave their approval for the death penalty. When asked whether life imprisonment or execution is more favored, 53 percent favored executing murderers. However, 53 percent believed that the death penalty did not deter others from killing (Gallop 2003). Society also feels more compassion towards abducted and murdered children. A Fox News survey, taken in 2002, indicated that 71 percent favored the execution of child murderers (Fox 2002). In addition, the more educated believed that the death penalty is unfairly applied, whereas those with little or no college believed capital punishment is fairly applied (Source Book of CJS). These polls taken indicate that most are for administering death and little more than half believe it does deter others from murdering. However, those that are more educated feel that the death penalty is unfairly applied. Considering these ratings, society is very biased in allowing personal feelings to get in the way when it comes to punishing murderers, which disrupts the judicial system's mission in providing uniform and proportionate punishment.
             Without looking any further or analyzing crime and victimization, the death penalty does deter those who made the rational choice to kill from killing again and therefore in this instance does arm the public with perceived reassurance of safety (notice I used the term rational). This belief, however, is simplicity at its best. Although an executed murderer will certainly never kill again in this lifetime, this simplistic reasoning has no general deterrence. For a type of punishment to work affectively and by using the free will premise, rational thinking must be a variable among the offender carrying out the crime. Established reason for c...