Footnotes (27)



Further Reflections on the Guillotine

Ronald J. Allen

Northwestern University Law School

Amy Shavell


Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol. 95, p. 625, 2005

The authors criticize the tone and substance of the current death penalty debate. The authors demonstrate that, as uncomfortable as it may sound, death is the commonality of social planning, and that all social policy decisions, including whether to have capital punishment, determine who will live and who will die. That we may execute some innocent people is an important consideration, but in light of the fact that without the death penalty other innocent people will be killed, it is not necessarily a reason to abandon it. If capital punishment deters crime, the point is obvious, but because the guilty will sometimes kill again if not executed, abolition would not obviously save innocent lives instead of merely displacing death. And just like any other form of social planning, the authors argue, such an allocation of death is the rightful province of a democratic society.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 12

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: April 20, 2005 ; Last revised: November 28, 2007

Suggested Citation

Allen, Ronald J. and Shavell, Amy, Further Reflections on the Guillotine. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol. 95, p. 625, 2005. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=707281

Contact Information

Ronald Jay Allen (Contact Author)
Northwestern University Law School ( email )
375 E. Chicago Ave
Chicago, IL 60611
United States
312-503-8372 (Phone)
312-503-2035 (Fax)

Amy Shavell
Independent ( email )
No Address Available
Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 3,263
Downloads: 186
Download Rank: 121,824
Footnotes:  27

© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 0.187 seconds