NEW YORK, June 11, 2007
Death Penalty Deters Murders, Studies Say
Hotly Debated Academic Analyses Claim Up To 18 Lives Saved Per Execution
-
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). (AP / file)
-
Interactive Capital Punishment Learn about the death penalty in the United States. Check out statistics, history, famous trials and more.
-
Interactive Crime Beat Statistics and specifics on crime in America.
In 2005, there were 16,692 cases of murder and non-negligent 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 top U.S. 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 have not 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.
© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
More From U.S.
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 81 CommentsAlso, there may be long-term vs. short-term effects. The death penalty reinforces the idea that it is ok to kill someone in order to derive a benefit. I have noticed that I reading about an execution causes me to feel less caring about people I don't know.
And yeah, Jeffrey Dahmer had a history of *** crimes violence - molesting little kids and killing animals (profilers see this as a precursor to murder) . . . actually that's one other argument in favor of the DP - Wisconsin doesn't have an official DP, so instead of having an execution, prison guards just kept giving Dahmer work assignments with the most violent people in prison until one finally finished the job.
At least 8% of those on death row had committed one or more murders prior to the murder(s) which put them on death row (23), suggesting that with 7,300 sentenced to death, since 1973, that those sent to death row had murdered at least 600 additional innocents after we failed to properly restrain them after their previous murder(s). Justice Department studies suggest that it is likely that some 2 million innocents have been harmed, 100,000 murdered, since 1973, by criminals while "supervised" by US criminal justice systems (parole, probation, mandatory release, furloughs, pre trial releases, etc.) (24).
One group of released death row inmates has been subject to limited review. In 1972 One group of released death row inmates was subject to limited review up till 1987. It appears that some 12 innocent people were murdered by those releases, in addition to other horrendous crimes committed by that same group, this part of the argument is of course are not counted by the media...
and Of course the death penalty will make people think twice about killing someone, that is just straight out logical and if between three and 18 innocent lives could be saved by the execution of each convicted killer, surely this would heavily out weigh the odd person who would be executed wrongly...
I also believe that child *** offenders should be excuted... It is far cheaper to excute the animal than to keep the rotter alive anyway..
jmmnycrckt said "If punishment were a deterent to crime then there would be no crime. Thus, since there is crime, punishment is not a deterent." Jimmy this is just rediculous, even Sinagpore has turned the crime rate around by being very strict about every thing, there will always be murders but people will think twice if they were also to die if caught..Within only a few months of schools doing away with corporal punishment, schools saw the down turn of the behaviour of children, now children rule the schools and homes... children are no longer taught self discipline, they dont have to they can get away with anything..
Self defense is the most basic of human rights and thank to the Second Amendment we can all be our very own bodyguards!
a-human-right.com
packing.org
One - Why is it that in Erope the murder rate is much much lower than in the US, despite the fact there s no death penalty. This means that any deterrent effect is statistically insignificant compared to some other factors - gun control perhaps?
Two - Why are the so called "right to lifers" generally more in favour of the death penalty. Presumably the right to life is only for foetuses.
Posted by jmmnycrckt at 05:10 PM : Jun 11, 2007
I am not trying to slam you but I feel you have not done the math. If the DP causes a 50% drop in murders by being in place as opposed to no DP, then to me it is a deterrent. The only true way to know how much it helps is to get in the minds of killers as they commit the act.
I have to disagree with that. A study that determined that "Forest fires prevent bears" was proven correct. that would make it a 'partial farce'. The real 'utter farce' is the original statement by jmmnycrckt:
Disagreement???
So what would your position be if there IS DNA evidence, as well as a by-the-book admission of guilt, combined with special circumstances?
Well, just to put that into perspective - upwards of 15,000 + innocent people die in automobile accidents EVERY YEAR. Okay, so it's irreversible - and on the tiny tiny tiny hint of a slight chance it could turn out they were actually proven innocent after having already been killed??? Well, frankly - that's just bad luck - especially if it means we save thousands of lives from murdering scum yet have to live with those unfortunate b*stards who got wrongly convicted... In the war against violent crime, there will unfortunately exist some collateral damage -
The driver was said to be a shooting suspect and armed. Penalties for this sort of chase should include every mile that the police have to chase the driver, one year in prison is tacked on to what other things the driver is charged with for every mile chased. No pleading, no early parole.
Posted by pakaal at 03:15 PM : Jun 11, 2007
Do some googling and find out how many deaths were caused by people convicted of murder since 1973. How many murderers are in prison, on death row.
In a later post you give this info, "More fun facts: Since 1973, 123 people in 25 states have been released from death row because they were not guilty." Subtract that number from the sum you got from the previous searches. Now, add the number of murders committed by released murderers that never received the DP. Tell us what you come up with.
Death can't be revoked, and our criminal justice system simply isn't good enough to guarantee more innocent people won't be killed by the death penalty in the future.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 81 Comments