Anti-death penalty forces have gained momentum in the past few years, with a moratorium in Illinois, court disputes over lethal injection in more than a half-dozen states and progress toward outright abolishment in New Jersey.
The steady drumbeat of DNA exonerations - pointing out flaws in the justice system - has weighed against capital punishment. The moral opposition is loud, too, echoed in Europe and the rest of the industrialized world, where all but a few countries banned executions years ago.
What gets little notice, however, is a series of academic studies over the last half-dozen years that claim to settle a once hotly debated argument - whether the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder. The analyses say yes. They count between three and 18 lives that would be saved by the execution of each convicted killer.
The reports have horrified death penalty opponents and several scientists, who vigorously question the data and its implications.
So far, the studies have had little impact on public policy. New Jersey's commission on the death penalty this year dismissed the body of knowledge on deterrence as "inconclusive."
But the ferocious argument in academic circles could eventually spread to a wider audience, as it has in the past.
"Science does really draw a conclusion. It did. There is no question about it," said Naci Mocan, an economics professor at the University of Colorado at Denver. "The conclusion is there is a deterrent effect."
A 2003 study he co-authored, and a 2006 study that re-examined the data, found that each execution results in five fewer homicides, and commuting a death sentence means five more homicides. "The results are robust, they don't really go away," he said. "I oppose the death penalty. But my results show that the death penalty (deters) - what am I going to do, hide them?"
Statistical studies like his are among a dozen papers since 2001 that capital punishment has deterrent effects. They all explore the same basic theory - if the cost of something (be it the purchase of an apple or the act of killing someone) becomes too high, people will change their behavior (forego apples or shy from murder).
To explore the question, they look at executions and homicides, by year and by state or county, trying to tease out the impact of the death penalty on homicides by accounting for other factors, such as unemployment data and per capita income, the probabilities of arrest and conviction, and more.
Among the conclusions:
- Each execution deters an average of 18 murders, according to a 2003 nationwide study by professors at Emory University. (Other studies have estimated the deterred murders per execution at three, five and 14).
- The Illinois moratorium on executions in 2000 led to 150 additional homicides over four years following, according to a 2006 study by professors at the University of Houston.
- Speeding up executions would strengthen the deterrent effect. For every 2.75 years cut from time spent on death row, one murder would be prevented, according to a 2004 study by an Emory University professor.
In 2005, there were 16,692 cases of murder and nonnegligent manslaughter nationally. There were 60 executions.
The studies' conclusions drew a philosophical response from a well-known liberal law professor, University of Chicago's Cass Sunstein. A critic of the death penalty, in 2005 he co-authored a paper titled "Is capital punishment morally required?"
"If it's the case that executing murderers prevents the execution of innocents by murderers, then the moral evaluation is not simple," he told The Associated Press. "Abolitionists or others, like me, who are skeptical about the death penalty haven't given adequate consideration to the possibility that innocent life is saved by the death penalty."
Sunstein said that moral questions aside, the data needs more study.
Critics of the findings have been vociferous.
Some claim that the pro-deterrent studies made profound mistakes in their methodology, so their results are untrustworthy. Another critic argues that the studies wrongly count all homicides, rather than just those homicides where a conviction could bring the death penalty. And several argue that there are simply too few executions each year in the United States to make a judgment.
"We just don't have enough data to say anything," said Justin Wolfers, an economist at the Wharton School of Business who last year co-authored a sweeping critique of several studies, and said they were "flimsy" and appeared in "second-tier journals."
"This isn't left vs. right. This is a nerdy statistician saying it's too hard to tell," Wolfers said. "Within the advocacy community and legal scholars who are not as statistically adept, they will tell you it's still an open question. Among the small number of economists at leading universities whose bread and butter is statistical analysis, the argument is finished."
Several authors of the pro-deterrent reports said they welcome criticism in the interests of science, but said their work is being attacked by opponents of capital punishment for their findings, not their flaws.
"Instead of people sitting down and saying 'let's see what the data shows,' it's people sitting down and saying 'let's show this is wrong,'" said Paul Rubin, an economist and co-author of an Emory University study. "Some scientists are out seeking the truth, and some of them have a position they would like to defend."
The latest arguments replay a 1970s debate that had an impact far beyond academic circles.
Then, economist Isaac Ehrlich had also concluded that executions deterred future crimes. His 1975 report was the subject of mainstream news articles and public debate, and was cited in papers before the U.S. Supreme Court arguing for a reversal of the court's 1972 suspension of executions. (The court, in 1976, reinstated the death penalty.)
Ultimately, a panel was set up by the National Academy of Sciences which decided that Ehrlich's conclusions were flawed. But the new pro-deterrent studies haven't gotten that kind of scrutiny.
At least not yet. The academic debate, and the larger national argument about the death penalty itself - with questions about racial and economic disparities in its implementation - shows no signs of fading away.
Steven Shavell, a professor of law and economics at Harvard Law School and co-editor-in-chief of the American Law and Economics Review, said in an e-mail exchange that his journal intends to publish several articles on the statistical studies on deterrence in an upcoming issue.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on June 10, 2007 05:36:37 PM
I just read an article in today's New York Daily News,page 10, entitled Death Penalty Doubts Grow, in which they talk about fears that innocent people could be executed in America's prisons are increasing among longtime death penalty supporters. After seeing hundreds of prisoners cleared of crimes, people are no longer confident that only the guilty are being killed. More than 60% of former capital punishment backers now believe innocent people have been sentenced to death. Project Innocence has secured the freedom of 203 wrongly convicted prisoners since 1989. "These findings show the public's appreciation of the lessons to be learned from wrongful convictions and from the ever-present possibility of human error" said Stepehn Saloom, the Project's policy director. "Exonerations have established irrefutably that the system does get it wrong sometimes. Whatever your position, you cannot ignore the fact that there have been 203 DNA exonerations, and counting."
posted on June 10, 2007 06:25:40 PM
Yes, it's always been known that some mistakes have taken place. And that's long been the argument used by the liberals who oppose the death penalty.
Murder the unborn, protect the criminals. The liberal way. tsk tsk tsk
I posted the studies....to share the results.
I don't expect to EVER be changing the minds of any anti-death penalty liberals.
posted on June 10, 2007 07:31:40 PM
The article I quoted in my post shows that pro-death penalty people are changing their minds. Hundreds of people have been cleared in recent years through DNA testing and they do not like the idea of executing innocent people. It doesn't mean much to clear someone after they have been executed. Death is so final, ya know?
posted on June 10, 2007 07:40:26 PM
linduh gets off on the death penalty because her godbush does....he can barely keep from giggling when talking about it....
Neocons scream about murdering the unborn but haven't a qualm about murdering an innocent adult.....
posted on June 10, 2007 08:09:40 PMWhat gets little notice, however, is a series of academic studies over the last half-dozen years that claim to settle a once hotly debated argument - whether the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder. The analyses say yes. They count between three and 18 lives that would be saved by the execution of each convicted killer.
I do not buy this argument at all.
There was a study done that compared the number of homicides in New York (no executions), Texas (allowed executions -238) and California (10 executions) over a 20 year period from 1982 to 2002 and there was no difference between these states in as far as executions did not deter any one from comitting murder. As the homicide rate went up nation wide so did the homicide rate in each of these three states. As the homicide rate went down nationwide so did the homicide rate in these three states.
The homicide rate went up nationwide 1.7% between 2002 and 2003, down 2.4% from 2003 to 2004 , up 3.4% nationwide between 2004 and 2005 and up again .3% between 2005 and 2006
The Illinois moratorium on executions in 2000 led to 150 additional homicides over four years following, according to a 2006 study by professors at the University of Houston
Further more the number of homicides in Illinois were:
So the study is not accurate at all. There was a slight increase after the death penalty moritorium went into effect but since then it has gone down.
So even without a dealth penalty to act as a deterrent, the number of homicides has decreased in Illinois. This goes against what the study posted above shows.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
Executions are carried out at staggering cost to taxpayers.
It costs far more to execute a person than to keep him or her in prison for life. A recent New Jersey Policy Perspectives report concluded that the state's death penalty has cost taxpayers $253 million since 1983, a figure that is over and above the costs that would have been incurred had the state utilized a sentence of life without parole instead of death. "From a strictly financial perspective, it is hard to reach a conclusion other than this: New Jersey taxpayers over the last 23 years have paid more than a quarter billion dollars on a capital punishment system that has executed no one," the report concluded. Michael Murphy, former Morris County, NJ prosecutor, remarked: "If you were to ask me how $11 million a year could best protect the people of New Jersey, I would tell you by giving the law enforcement community more resources. I'm not interested in hypotheticals or abstractions, I want the tools for law enforcement to do their job, and $11 million can buy a lot of tools."
Capital punishment does not deter crime.
Scientific studies have consistently failed to demonstrate that executions deter people from committing crime anymore than long prison sentences. Moreover, states without the death penalty have much lower murder rates. The South accounts for 80% of US executions and has the highest regional murder rate.
The USA is unable to prevent accidental execution of innocent people.
The wrongful execution of an innocent person is an injustice that can never be rectified. Since the reinstatement of the death penalty, 123 men and women have been released from Death Row nationally....some only minutes away from execution. Moreover, in the past two years evidence has come to light which indicates that four men may have been wrongfully EXECEUTED in recent years for crimes they did not commit. This error rate is simply appalling, and completely unacceptable, when we are talking about life and death.
Race plays a role in determining who lives and who dies.
Race is an important factor in determining who is sentenced to die. In 1990 a report from the General Accounting Office concluded that "in 82 percent of the studies [reviewed], race of the victim was found to influence the likelihood of being charged with capital murder or receiving the death penalty, i.e. those who murdered whites were more likely to be sentenced to death than those who murdered blacks."
The death penalty is applied at random.
Politics, quality of legal counsel and the jurisdiction where a crime is committed are more often the determining factors in a death penalty case than the facts of the crime itself. The death penalty is a lethal lottery: of the 22,000 homicides committed every year aproximately 150 people are sentenced to death.
Capital punishment goes against almost every religion.
Although isolated passages of religious scripture have been quoted in support of the death penalty, almost all religious groups in the United States regard executions as immoral.
The USA is keeping company with notorious human rights abusers.
The vast majority of countries in Western Europe, North America and South America — more than 128 nations worldwide — have abandoned capital punishment in law or in practice. The United States remains in the same company as Iraq, Iran and China as one of the major advocates and users of capital punishment.
Millions could be diverted to helping the families of murder victims.
Many family members who have lost love ones to murder feel that the death penalty will not heal their wounds nor will it end their pain; the extended process prior to executions can prolong the agony experienced by the family. Funds now being used for the costly process of executions could be used to help families put their lives back together through counseling, restitution, crime victim hotlines, and other services addressing their needs.
Bad Lawyers are a Persistent Problem
Perhaps the most important factor in determining whether a defendant will receive the death penalty is the quality of the representation he or she is provided. Almost all defendants in capital cases cannot afford their own attorneys. In many cases, the appointed attorneys are overworked, underpaid, or lacking the trial experience required for death penalty cases. There have even been instances in which lawyers appointed to a death case were so inexperienced that they were completely unprepared for the sentencing phase of the trial. Other appointed attorneys have slept through parts of the trial, or arrived at the court under the influence of alcohol.
Life Without Parole is a Sensible Alternative to the Death Penalty
California judges have the option of sentencing convicted capital murderers to life in prison without the possibility of parole. There are currently over 3,300 people in California who have received this alternative sentence which includes a limited appeals process. The sentence is cheaper to tax-payers and keeps violent offenders off the streets for good. According to the Governor's Office, only seven people sentenced to life without parole has been released since the state provided for this option in 1977, and this occurred because they were able to prove their innocence. Unlike the death penalty, a sentence of Life Without Parole allows mistakes to be corrected.
posted on June 10, 2007 08:35:10 PM
Linda_K
posted on June 9, 2007 02:13:24 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If people weren't pointing out to you how WRONG you are.....no one would be talking to you at all."""
posted on June 13, 2007 08:57:57 PM
Amazing how Linda no longer defends how the death penalty acts as a deterrent when she has been proved wrong. She believes the so-called facts of a study, but when the facts are proven to be wrong she does not have a leg to stand on.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on June 14, 2007 03:43:16 AMThats why after they are found guilty, they need to be taken out back and immediately shot.
I guess you do not believe in the appeals process. So people that are found guilty should serve their sentences immedialtely. I am glad someone here believes Libby should start serving his 30 months sentence.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on June 14, 2007 11:58:44 AM
I guess you do not believe in the appeals process. So people that are found guilty should serve their sentences immedialtely. I am glad someone here believes Libby should start serving his 30 months sentence.
Just proves you dont know the difference between death penalty cases and other criminal cases.
It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.George S. Patton
posted on June 15, 2007 08:26:42 AMJust proves you don't know the difference between death penalty cases and other criminal cases.
No you don't. In either type of case, those found guilty have the right to appeal. But I guess you do not care about the rights of those that are condemned to death and don't mind executing innocent people.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
