I mean there are places where removing a hand is still the standard, and it reduces but doesn't end crime.
Over time, Europe has abolished the death penalty. They have the lowest murder rates in the history of civilization. In the US, there are wide variations between states for violent crime. Unsurprisingly, the states with the most draconian laws have the highest rates of crime.
I've concluded that violent punishment does not reduce violent crime.
Moreover, the violent crime rates for many parts of the US are no higher than in Europe. Coincidentally, those places tend to be the same states that have ended capital punishment.
Now, I'm not drawing a causal relationship between draconian punishment and an increase in crime. I'm just saying there's demonstrably no relationship between "tough on crime" harsh sentencing and a decrease in crime. Fear of violent retribution by the State is not what stops people from committing crimes. We have to look at other reasons.