The first paper argues that the death penalty is a necessary tool to fight and deter crime and that capital punishment deters crime by causing would-be murderers to fear arrest and conviction and by preventing convicted murderers from killing again. The second paper maintains that capital punishment makes the fight against crime more difficult by wasting valuable resources that could be applied to more promising efforts to protect the public; additionally, innocent people are sometimes executed and the brutalizing effect executions have on society may result in more murders. A third paper argues that a swifter death penalty would be an effective deterrent and that this can be achieved by eliminating abuses of the use of the writ of habeas corpus to delay death sentences. A fourth paper presents findings from a survey of police chiefs to show that a strong majority of police chiefs do not believe that capital punishment is an effective law enforcement tool and that other methods of crime control are more effective. Another paper argues that there is no credible evidence that the use of capital punishment has any discernible effect on murder rates. A supporter of the death penalty argues that it is only common sense that if a person is threatened with death if he/she does not comply with certain demands, then that person will comply with those demands; thus, the death penalty is a logical deterrent. In arguing against the death penalty, another paper not only cites evidence that there is no reduction in homicide due to the death penalty but also presents evidence that in jurisdictions where the death penalty is used homicides increase. Other papers argue that death is inherently the most effective deterrent to prevent recidivism and that it may save innocent lives that would otherwise have been terminated by dangerous persons who might be released from prison. A 45-item bibliography and a subject index