DEATH PENALTY DETERS MURDER

NCPA Daily Policy Digest ^ | May 7, 2003 | William Tucker

[bruinbirdman]

Using data from U.S. Census Reports, a correlation between executions and homicide rate from 1930-2000 can be shown, says William Tucker. His data reveals falling murder rates when the death penalty is implemented and escalating murder rates when the courts prohibited capital punishment in the early 1960s.

There is no way to contravene the logic of murder, he explains, except through the death penalty. No amount of victims' pleading or cajoling -- no promises that "I won't tell" -- will ever convince a robber or rapist that there isn't an advantage to escalating the crime to murder.

The only plausible deterrent is a qualitatively different punishment, he says:

o If the punishment for robbery is a few years in jail and the punishment for murder is a few more years after that, there is very little if any deterrence -- but if the punishment for robbery is jail time and the punishment for murder is death, there is reason to think twice.

o By contrast, eliminating the death penalty creates the exact same dilemma -- without any qualitative differential, there is no disincentive to murder the victim of the crime.

Almost the entire increase in murder from 1966 to the mid-1900s was an increase in felony or "stranger" murders -- murders committed during the course of another crime. Only when executions resumed in the 1990s did the murder rate drop precipitously to its 1960s level.

Source: William Tucker, "Deterring Homicides/With the Death Penalty," Human Events, Vol. 59, No. 12, April 2003.

For more information

For more on Crime

[Paleo Conservative]

Almost the entire increase in murder from 1966 to the mid-1900s was an increase in felony or "stranger" murders

That's a strange sentence. I didn't know time travel had been perfected.

[Vigilanteman]

Common sense. Criminals are godless and fear nothing but a ticket to hell. Personally, I think we should bring back public hangings on the court house square. There is nothing like the site of a suspended corpse twisting in the wind to make a would-be killer think twice.

[ppaul]

BOOKMARKED
BUMP

[Squawk 8888]

Correlation is NOT causation. It may well be a deterrent but this study proves nothing because it ignores several confounders including the intensification of the drug war since the 60s, urban renewal, and the aging population of the 90s.

[edwin hubble]

"Hmm...ok - and water is wet, fire burns, democrats are scum, we know all this "

Actually, the consensus among criminologists has always been that the death penalty has NO deterrent effect.

So this is 'news'.

[detsaoT]

Couldn't-agree-more-bump.

[RLK]

Actually, the consensus among criminologists has always been that the death penalty has NO deterrent effect.

------------------------

It has a deterrent eggect.

[cake_crumb]

Thanks for posting this.

Unfortunately, the way the appeals system is set up, most death-rowers will die of old age rather than execution. Their VICTIMS pleading may not have stopped the murderer from murdering them, but the MURDERERS know THEIR pleading WILL buy them as much time as they want.

[The Other Harry]

Most criminologists will dispute the notion that the death penalty serves as a deterrent. The data to support that simply isn't there.

What does serve as a deterrent is the expectation of getting apprehended. Most criminals either do not expect to be apprehended or they do not take the possible consequences of their crimes into account at the the time they commit them.

[lizma]

For the past twenty years I've heard the death penalty ISN'T a deterent.

Nice to see that common sense and the silent majority are finally starting to speak out.

[edwin hubble]

Death Penalty...
"It has a deterrent eggect. "

RLK,
I have always enjoyed your wit and irony.
I have still working on "eggect" and am feeling very dense.
I may have to ask you email me a reference on that one.

[Eleven Bravo 6 319thID]

The deterrent effect on those executed is absolute.

[The Other Harry]

The deterrent effect on those executed is absolute.

True, but...

In an approximately Christian society, there is no need for us to be executing people. It removes them, but it sets a bad example.

[okie01]

"Actually, the consensus among criminologists has always been that the death penalty has NO deterrent effect."

Oh, but it does! Those murderers who are executed will never murder again.

[RLK]

I have still working on "eggect" and am feeling very dense.

------------

G is close to F on the Keyboard. I often don't catch it when my finger slips. Eggect=effect.

[heidispring]

The death penalty is not deterrent to other would-be murderers. How can it deter when most people don't even know which offenses are death penalty eligible? In addition, the death penalty was not abolished in the early 60s. IT WAS ABOLISHED IN 1972 AND RETURNED IN 1976. Before it was abolished, death penalty cases were already rare. After it was reinstated,however, states (primarily southern) pursued it with a vengeance. Could this possibly have anything to do with the southern states being pissed just because the supreme court had told them in 1972 that they could not carry the death penalty out anymore. By the way, the case which resulted in the abolition of the death penalty was Furman v. Georgia. First, educate yourself, then if you still have the same opinion more people will probably take you seriously.

[dighton]

The death penalty is not deterrent to other would-be murderers. How can it deter when most people don't even know which offenses are death penalty eligible?

Welcome to FreeRepublic. My, what an old thread you've bumped!

Gotta be careful around here. Some people still believe in death by electrocution.