Retribution also serves justice for murder victims and their families. Some may see this as revenge, but this retribution is not motivated by malice, rather it is motivated by the need for justice and the principle of lex talionis : "an eye for an eye (Green 1)." This lack of malice is proven in the simple definition of retribution: "retribution is a state sponsored, rational response to criminality that is justified given that the state is the victim when a crime occurs (Justifications 1)." The death penalty puts the scales of justice back in balance after they were unfairly tipped towards the criminal.
The use of capital punishment greatly deters citizens from committing crimes such as murder. Many people's greatest fear is death; consequently if they know that death is a possible outcome for their actions, they are less likely to perform such actions. Ernest van den Haag, a professor at Fordham University, wrote about the issue of deterrence: "capital punishment is likely to deter more than other punishments because people fear death more than anything else. They fear most death deliberately inflicted by law and scheduled by the courts.Hence, the threat of the death penalty may deter some murderers who otherwise might not have been deterred. And surely the death penalty is the only penalty that could deter prisoners already serving a life sentence and tempted to kill a guard, or offenders about to be arrested and facing a life sentence (Death 1)." He argues that capital punishment is the strongest deterrent society has against murder, which has been shown to be true in numerous studies. "Since society has the highest interest in preventing murder, it should use the strongest punishment available to deter murder (Death 1)." In a study conducted by Isaac Ehrlich in 1973, it was found that for each execution of a criminal seven potential victim's lives were saved (Death 1).