Death penalty deterrence

Many claim the death penalty is not a deterrent, however this view is totally wrong. A study in 1985 by economist Stephan K. Layson claimed 18 lives where saved by each execution. The study also argued if you raise death penalty sentencing by 1%, you save 105 lives. In 1972-1976 a temporary suspension of capital punishment occured. Texas A & M researcher Karl Spence notes:

While some [death penalty] abolitionists try to face down the results of their disastrous experiment and still argue to the contrary, the...[data] concludes that a substantial deterrent effect has been observed...In six months, more Americans are murdered than have killed by execution in this entire century...Until we begin to fight crime in earnest [by using the death penalty], every person who dies at a criminal's hands is a victim of our inaction.[1]

Wesley Lowe makes a cool little graph:






Here is a short list of studies claiming deterrence (list is larger now--look up the CJLF tally, but this highlights some of the older studies).

(2003) Emory University Study finds each execution saves 18 lives, margin of error is ten (so it could be 28 or 8).
(2003) Naci Moacan finds each execution saves 5-6 lives, and every time someone is let out of death row 1 life is lost (so more execution more lives saved)
(2001) Study in Texas found the state wide moratorium caused 150 deaths to homocide
(2001) Professor Liu says aboloshing the DP raises crime by ending one deterrent effect (the DP) and makes it seem the state is easy on crime and lowers the deterrent effect of prison, too.
(2003) Each execution leads to 5 less murders
(2003) Each execution deters 3-25 murders
(2003) Dezhbakhsh and Shepherd argued: "The results are boldly clear: executions deter murders and murder rates increase substantially during moratoriums. The results are consistent across before-and-after comparisons and regressions regardless of the data's aggregation level, the time period, or the specific variable to measure executions."[2]

 The debate has changed dramatically since then. In 2006 Donahue and Wolfers have claimed to have destroyed the deterrent hypothesis, but their analysis was refuted by Zimmerman 2009, Cloninger & Marchesini 2009, Dezhbakhsh & Rubin 2010, and a new study by Frakes & Harding 2009 says the death penalty reduces child murder 20%.[3] Most studies criticize the deterrence work with the same objections all answered by these rebuttal papers to Donahue and Wolfers 2006. The main criticism is the results are not robust and, therefore, are susceptible to bias. What is funny is in many of these studies the authors even admit they are against the death penalty (Shepard in one of the PDF's I read said he opposed it). And Nanci Moacan who defended his analysis early on noted:

"Science does really draw a conclusion. It did. There is no question about it. . . . The conclusion is there is a deterrent effect. . . . The results are robust, they don't really go away. I oppose the death penalty. But my results show that the death penalty (deters). What am I going to do, hide them?"[4]

John Lott, an economist, noted in his Fox News column that 9 out of twelve economic studies on the issue of deterrence found a deterrent effect (not counting his 2007 study in his book Freedomnomics published after this article and which I will soon have the pleasure to read) and he essentially gets the same statistics as the studies mentioned. Lott notes:

Generally, the studies over the last decade that examined how the murder rates in each state changed as they changed their execution rate found that each execution saved the lives of roughly 15 to 18 potential murder victims. Overall, the rise in executions during the 1990s accounts for about 12 to 14 percent of the overall drop in murders.[5]

A 1999 study from Isaac Ehrlich and Liu which was the oldest study after 1996 I could find in the internet (via jstor). Ehrlich uses a corrected version of his statistical analysis which many viewed unfit in his original study in the seventies; he argued it corrects the problems cited by anti capital punishment academics. The study shows that deterrence theory is not “doubtful” and has significant evidence behind the assertion. His study, however, he conceded does not “prove” deterrence, more work is needed, however he also argues he offers significant evidence for that conclusion. He concludes that, on balance, stricter punishments (like the DP) on balance decrease crime.[6]

(the quotes look different different because I copied and pasted this from an online debate I had)

 The final study I will look at in depth is the 2004 study by Shepard (he has done a lot of work in the field). His study is the most commonly heard statistic in the issue. He has three main findings. 1) On average, each execution saves 3 lives, 2) the study shows it benefits African Americans the most, saving 1.5 African America lives, one person of white decent, and .5 of other people. (If you understand statistics the decimals showing up make sense), and 3) shortening time on death row decreases murder. Reducing time on death row by 2.75 years saves one additional life.[7]

 Murray Rothbard noted in 1978:

Another common liberal complaint is that the death penalty does not deter murder from being committed. All sorts of statistics are slung back and forth trying to "prove" or disprove this claim. While it is impossible to prove the degree of deterrence, it seems indisputable that some murders would be deterred by the death penalty. Sometimes the liberal argument comes perilously close to maintaining that no punishment deters any crime — a manifestly absurd view that could easily be tested by removing all legal penalties for nonpayment of income tax and seeing if there is any reduction in the taxes paid. (Wanna bet?) Furthermore, the murderer himself is certainly "deterred" from any repetition of his crime — and quite permanently.[8]

 Dudley Sharp (JFA) noted in 1997:

6% of young adults paroled in 1978 after having been convicted of murder were arrested for murder again within 6 years of release. ... Of the roughly 52,000 state prison inmates serving time for murder in 1984, an estimated 810 had previously been convicted of murder and had killed 821 persons following their previous murder convictions. Executing each of these inmates would have saved 821 lives." (41, 1 Stanford Law Review, 11/88, pg. 153)  Using a 75% murder clearance rate, it is most probable that the actual number of lives saved would have been 1026, or fifty times the number legally executed that year. This suggests that some 10,000 persons have been murdered, since 1971, by those who had previously committed additional murders (JFA).[9]

 Current numbers since 1973 show 28,000 recidivist murders have occurred, so if the death penalty was applied in all of these cases 28,000 lives would have been saved (not including deterrence).[10]

Summary:

(1) The death penalty saves MANY lives per execution, 1,254 - 35,112 lives saved since 1973. 

(2) The death penalty prevents recidivism and if execution was always used for murder 821 lives would be saved each year (1988 study) or 28,000 lives saved total (BJS data from 2007)

Either way, the DP saves lives. 

1. http://www.wesleylowe.com/cp.html#deter
2. Studies from: http://www.wesleylowe.com/deter.html
3. http://www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/dpdeterrence.htm
4. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/11/AR2007061100406.html
5. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,284336,00.html
6. Isaac Ehrlich and Zhiqiang Liu. “Sensitivity Analyses of the Deterrence Hypothesis: Let's Keep the Econ in Econometrics”, Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 42, No. S1, (April 1996), 455-488.
7.  Joanna M. Shepherd, “Murders of Passion, Execution Delays, and the Deterrence of Capital Punishment,” Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 33 (June 2004), 283-321.
8.  http://mises.org/daily/4468
9. http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/dp.html#B.Deterrence
10. http://homicidesurvivors.com/2012/04/06/innocents-more-at-risk-without-death-penalty.aspx

Summary of Death Penalty Research

Deterrence

• 17 studies find deterrence, 5 find no deterrence, 2 are non-conclusive. The NRC (nap.edu) report is often falsely cited by abolitionists. It actually says evidence exists for the hypothesis, but is weak. They also concede, however, that research saying it has no effect (or increases crime) is also non-conclusive.

“Tally of Death Penalty Deterrence Studies, Published Peer-Reviewed Journals from 1996 to 2010,” CJLF, 2010 http://www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/dpdeterrence.htm

•  Many people still cite Donahue and Wolfers (2005) in order to refute the deterrence hypothesis. They claim the studies are not robust and lead to bias. However recent rebuttals dispel these claims and it is irrelevant anyway, many of these deterrence authors oppose the death penalty for other reasons. 

 An example of one of these rebuttal papers:  http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00036841003670804

Example of an abolitionist author: Nancy Moacan 

• There is mountians of evidence the DP deters. Gary Becker notes, “the
  frequently stated claim that these studies prove that capital punishment does not deter is clearly
  false.”

 http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2005/12/further-comments-on-capital-punishment-becker.html

• Even if we agree with D & W 2005, we can still believe the death penalty serves as a deterrent. For example, 99.9% (actual statistic) of criminals fight for life, not death. This indicates criminals fear death more then a life time in jail. Many studies have found higher incarnation rates deter crime, and if the DP is not preferred it is illogical to think it has no effect (this also lends the to the fact the DP is a stronger deterrent then LWOP).  

http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/dp.html#B.Deterrence

Cost 

• Many claimed the death penalty is more expensive then LWOP. This claim is false and has been rebutted. The threat of a death sentence causes many murderers to admit to their crimes, if this happens during a trial it saves a lot of money after, and if done before leads to the trial costing zero. These pleas are four times higher in death penalty states then in abolitionist ones (note: this lends more evidence to deterrence as they fear death--plea bargains mean they get LWOP as maximum punishment). All studies that claim the death penalty costs more ignore this variable. 

Kent Scheidegger, "The Death Penalty and Plea Bargaining to Life Sentences," CJLF, (2009), http://www.cjlf.org/papers/wpaper09-01.pdf

• Many have claimed states (like California) have high costs because of death row. Look at it like this: That's an argument for reform not repeal. States like Virginia have made these reforms where you can only be on death row for 5 years. The costs of geriatric healthcare (among other things) are cut nearly to zero if the time is cut under the Virginia experience. LWOP would lead to much more health care costs then a Virginia type DP system. 

Virginia AG 

• A estimate done by Dudley sharp in 1997 summarizes his findings, "Many opponents present, as fact, that the cost of the death penalty is so expensive (at least $2 million per case?), that we must choose life without parole ("LWOP") at a cost of $1 million for 50 years.  Predictably, these pronouncements may be entirely false. JFA estimates that LWOP cases will cost $1.2 million - $3.6 million more than equivalent death penalty cases" In other words, LWOP costs 1-3 million dollars MORE then DP cases,

 http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/dp.html#D.Cost

•  An article which I wrote cites many academic findings on the issue

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2012/09/04/wait-does-the-dp-really-cost-too-much-an-analysis.aspx

• “In recent years, studies, articles, and reports have been published on the costs associated with the death penalty at state level. They have generally concluded that, contrary to what many people believe, death sentence cases cost more than non-death sentence cases. However, we found these conclusions were not adequately supported. Most of the studies did not actually compare death sentence cases with non-death sentence cases, and some of the studies did not contain actual cost data. Further, even cases where cost data were cited, these data where incomplete” 

 US General Accounting Office, “Limited Fata Available on Costs of Death Sentences”, Report to the Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights, Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, (September 1989).

• Many studies find the DP only costs 117,000 more (same ballpark range). After other variables are accounted for, however, the number shrinks. A Virginia type system makes the DP cost thousands less.  Analysis by John Sorensen and Rocky Pilgrim found the DP costs the same OR LESS then LWOP cases. 

Sorensen, Jonathan R., and Rocky LeAnn Pilgrim. “Lethal Injection: Capital Punishment in Texas during the Modern Era.” Austin, TX: University of Texas, 2006. Print.

• Many studies suffer flaws by not even comparing LWOP to DP, or only compare the extreme cases.  Many studies also ignore LWOP healthcare costs. These studies are wrought with so much error, they have been discredited.

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/05/07/cost-savings-the-death-penalty.aspx

• A 1997 report by Gary D. Beatty (a lawyer) finds many of these states are using the appeals process irresponsibly, and if used correctly the DP would be much cheaper. He notes, "If the multiple layers of appeal are pursued in an ethical, and fiscally responsible manner, execution is less costly than warehousing a murderer for life." He actuslly finds death penalty opponents stalling and supporting murderers appeal raises the cost, and without them DP costs would plummet to (record in the modern era) lows!

http://www.fed-soc.org/publications/detail/the-next-time-someone-says-the-death-penalty-costs-more-than-life-in-prison-show-them-this-article

Racial problems?

• RAND studies actually find whites are are at a higher risk to be executed then blacks, and white defendants murdering whites are the most likely to be executed. Wait, its still discrimination! True, however when RAND took the heinousness of the crime into account the unfairness factor washed away. In other words, they choose the DP based on the crime, not race. This data is extremely compelling compared to the studies concluding the opposite. Three teams using the same data, but different methodologies, got the same results. In other words, the other studies where REALLY missing something.

 Stephen P. Klein, Richard A. Berk, Laura J. Hickman, eds., "Race and the Decision to Seek the Death Penalty in Federal Cases" Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, (June 2006).

•  40% of those death penalty cases involve blacks, and they are only 12% of the population, this is evidence of discrimination. Here is my question: is it? Not really. Separate analyses show these basic comparisons are weak and cannot be relied upon to make a case for racial discrimination. The problem with studies that argue its racially biased is simple: they fail to control for many of the legal factors. Jon Sorensen and Rocky Pilgrim decided to control for these factors. When they did, the racial effect disappeared. Further, 50% (about) of those committing murder are black and, therefore, giving them only 40% of cases is generous! statistically, we can get to 50% before being racist. “Studies that use the proportion of blacks involved in murder as the baseline *note this is the only accurate way you can do it* often conclude that there is no discrimination against black defendants … [E]vidence of racial disparity has all but disappeared.”

  Sorensen, Jonathan R., and Rocky LeAnn Pilgrim. “Lethal Injection: Capital Punishment in Texas during the Modern Era.” Austin, TX: University of Texas, 2006. Print.

• “For both capital charges and death sentences, race either played no role or a small role that is very difficult to specify. In short, it is very difficult to find convincing evidence for racial effects in the Maryland data and if there are any, they may not be additive.” He even further noted, “cases with a black defendant and white victim or 'other' racial combination are less likely to have a death sentence”

 Richard Berk, Azusa Li, and Laura J. Hickman, “Statistical Difficulties in Determining the Role of Race in Capital Cases: A Re-analysis of Data from the State of Maryland,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology, Vol. 21, No. 4 (December, 2005), 365-390.

• A study done using the baseline described by Sorensen and Pilgrim (though used the baseline before Sorensen brought it up) concluded the criminal justice system (including the DP) had no racist effect--it was a myth!

William Wilbanks, "THE MYTH OF A RACIST CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM," 

CONCLUSION: 

Based on current research, when the facts are released support for the DP should rise.

 

Assortment of links on the death penalty

This is a less formal post of links for those looking for info on the PRO death penalty position.

Specific must reads:

Alexander Adams, "Wait, does the Death Penalty really cost too much An analysis", 2012 http://homicidesurvivors.com/2012/09/04/wait-does-the-dp-really-cost-too-much-an-analysis.aspx

Dudley Sharp, "Death Penalty Costs: California", 2012
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2012/09/07/death-penalty-costs-california.aspx?results=1#SurveyResultsChart


Wesley Lowe, "Pro Capital Punishment Webpage", http://www.wesleylowe.com/cp.html

Dudley Sharp "Death Penalty IS a deterrent"  http://www.wesleylowe.com/deter.html

"Tally of Death Penalty Deterrence Studies" CJLF http://www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/dpdeterrence.htm

"Death Penalty Deterrence Articles" CJLF http://www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/dpdeterrencefull.htm

Dudley Sharp "Understanding Deterrence", 2010 http://homicidesurvivors.com/2010/06/18/understanding-deterrance.aspx

Dudley Sharp "Lethal Injection: Controversies resolved", 2009 http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/12/07/lethal-injection-controversies-resolved.aspx

Dudley Sharp "Death Penalty and Sentencing information", 1997 http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/dp.html

Dudley Sharp "Innocence issues--The death penalty" 2000 http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/Innocence.htm

Ward A. Campbell "Critique of the DPIC "Innocence" List", 2001 http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DPIC.htm

Jay Johansen "Does the Death Penalty Deter Crime?" 1998, http://www.johansens.us/sane/law/capdeter.htm

David Muhlhanusen, PHD "The Death Penalty Deters Crime and Saves Lives", 2007 http://www.heritage.org/research/testimony/the-death-penalty-deters-crime-and-saves-lives

http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/Innocence.htm
Pro Death Penalty sites with even MORE links:

http://homicidesurvivors.com/categories/Death%20Penalty.aspx
http://prodpinNC.blogspot.com/
http://www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPinformation.htm 
http://www.clarkprosecutor.org/html/links/dplinks.htm 
http://www.coastda.com/archives.html
http://www.lexingtonprosecutor.com/death_penalty_debate.htm
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com
http://yesdeathpenalty.googlepages.com/home2    
http://www.wesleylowe.com/cp.html

Have fun :)

Death Penalty innocents? What a scam.

A mere Google search of executed innocents you get the ACLU, but you also get the famous DPIC innocents list [1]. This list, however, is highly misleading.

Many critiques have been given to the list. For example, 68 of those people on the list should not even be there, and this means less then 1/5 of 1% of those executed where "innocent". Many of their sources where weak and the writers of their main study argued their work was uncertain and weak. And many of the cited works agree there are many policies in place preventing false executions. Further, the time frame is biased as it includes pre-Furman trial cases before rigorous tests preventing innocents being executed being in place. Due to the fact is uses executions before these tests where mandated it easily increases innocents chances of being executed. Post-Furman executions reduce the likelihood of  innocent execution and, therefore, only data after Furman can be used (the modern executions). The time frame, therefore, is biased towards an anti-death penalty position [2].

Further, the list does not differentiate between actual innocence and legal innocence. In many of these cases, they are let out from clemency or legal technicalities. In other words, the people on the list might actually be guilty,  however they are let out based on technicalities [3]. Its funny! The DPIC to increase their list to promote anti-death penalty propaganda are arguing based on legal innocence, not actual innocence!

Further, innocents are safer with the DP! The DP has a 99.6% accuracy rate. Further, the death penalty prevents recidivism and therefore saves many innocent lives. Dudley Sharp notes, “Murderers that we have allowed to murder again, recidivist murderers, MIGHT number around 28,000 since 1973, based upon existing studies.” Basically we see the amount of lives saved hugely outweighs the weak innocents claim which I have shown to be false anyway. He further notes, “28 studies, beginning in 2000, find for a deterrent effect, ranging from 1-28 innocent lives spared per execution, or totals from 1,254 - 35,112 innocent lives saved”[4]. Innocents are, on balance, helped by the DP.

When facts prevail, we see the anti death penalty crowd is struggling for air.



[1] http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-list-those-freed-death-row
[2] http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/dpic.htm
[3] http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/03/04/fact-checking-issues-on-innocence-and-the-death-penalty.aspx
[4] http://homicidesurvivors.com/2012/04/06/innocents-more-at-risk-without-death-penalty.aspx