This leads to an argument about capital punishment; that it is, in fact, a deterrent to crime. Actually, from the looks of what type of punishment allowed to continue in Jamaica, capital punishment is clearly not. Jamaica ranks third in the highest amount of murders per capita in the world. Has been for years now, although the last hanging took place in the late 80's. The argument is that it was hardly used and hence the need to "bring hanging back". But, before and, most likely, after it is re-constituted, I have a feeling that crime would not abate. I don't want to sound like a pessimist, but crime goes hand in hand with alot of other factors that have absolutely nothing to do with fear of punishment.
I would say, quite boldly, why would I feel fear or have fear, from doing something as passionate as murder, when it's something I really wanted to do or had to do? So what about the punishment? I killed that guy and that makes me feel better.
Even now proponents of capital punishment, have stopped using it as an argument because the idea of the deterrence of crime and capital punishment, cannot be correlated on any statistical relation and in my estimation, logical basis. For one reason, how do you deter someone from committing a crime they committed? This back to the future type of mentality is simply science fiction.
The second plank for the deterrence argument, sets out to suggest that folks who may commit capital crimes, would be deterred by visible and swift hangings. Fact is, this is not the case at all. Statistics from every capital punishment jurisdiction to non capital punishment jurisdiction, do not find any correlation with lower capital offences than it is with higher capital offences. In fact, there is no evidence to suggest anything to do with "punishment" and "crime" at all. The basis for it is simply neither here nor there.
How did we begin to assume capital punishment has anything to do with deterring crime? Well, it is one of the great logical fallacies of the 20th century. Something where developed societies, grappled with it and, have ended their long standing position on any defence of its effectiveness. It's only the developing world that believes capital punishment in some way deters crime. Perhaps it is a reason why they are perpetually called developing?
This leads to a second stream of thought debouched on the merits of capital punishment. And, that is the self degradation of developing countries by the proponents, who say, outright, their society is not as established as the developed countries--so, this is why they have to employ capital punishment tactics, in an attempt to reign in bad elements of their society. This is one of thee most far out ideas I have ever heard used in this debate. This argument holds as much water- and is just as effective- as the old colonial racial tactic of "breeding out" the slave population by the white master, which was then seen as the only way to "clean" the black race. It's laughable to see capital punishment proponents, switch the argument, just to make it fit into whatever rationale they have about social living and crime. Unbelievable.
Fact of the matter is however, crime, yet again, is in developed countries and regions as it is in developing societies and some developing societies, have low crime rates in spite of the capital punishment mechanism or without.
There simply is no statistical correlation with developed and developing countries, to say, on any level, or, any time, that that can hold up as an argument. There is crime in New York city, where they have abolished the death penalty and crime has spiked and declined, just as easily, without the manipulation of the death penalty apparatus or argument espoused. The highest rise in murder rates in the US was in Kansas, between the period of 1996-2007. Are proponents trying to suggest that rural, peace loving Kansas State, is more backward than New York in regards to civilization? For example
The death penalty is not employed in the United Kingdom and certainly not in England. But, crime is relatively low per-capita than any other country. Why is that? Same can be said in France.
Even when proponents make the immigrant argument in developed countries in relation to developing countries and lack of civilization, you would have difficulty making the argument. East London has a higher immigrant population than most other parts of the UK and its crime statistics, are equally comparable to that of Birmingham or Scotland, where crime is equally as high with lower levels of immigrants. In fact, Scotland is the murder capital of the UK, with higher murder rates per-capita than in any other part of the UK.
The same mixed bag of conflicting theories can be found in the varying US states, as the differences between Kansas and New York, on that level, simply do not have comparable variables. Kansas has a lower immigrant population per volume and per-capita than that of New York. So, what exactly are we trying to say? Nothing.
Fact of the matter is- and sorry to have to burst the proponents of capital punishment's bubble again- that there simply is no relation between murder and capital punishment, to suggest it as a deterrent, on any level, for any reason--long term or short term.
So, we really have to discuss the merits of capital punishment, where folks, like this author, see from the end motive of the proponents, even before they arrived to it themselves. And, that is, it is used as a form of retribution and revenge on the murderous thug who killed that innocent victim.
I don't quite understand why folks form particular quarters just don't come out and say it. Say, quite boldly; "we want to kill (but don't have the guts to do it )the person who killed somebody else. It would make feel better, to know that some punk, got killed because he killed someone else."
While I share their pain, and pray for the victims of slain family members--like I have felt the pain and grieved over a family member of mine who was savaged by a gunman--I have a problem with acting in haste and with ill regard, when I speak of this issue. Not that I am trying to protect the young punk who killed. But, because, it moves us away from other root issues for crime and murder and, it does not make enough room, once we start this slippery slope, to deal with people who may have; killed by accident; killed in self defence, but unprovable; were provoked to kill; who killed in the heat of passion and so on and so forth.
Are we really trying to suggest that a man who walks into his house to find his wife in the sweet throe's of passionate love with another man, deserved no true justice and mercy because he killed someone society may have liked and/or loved dearly? A man, who may be an upstanding citizen, who just happens to have had a bad day at the worst time? Does he deserve death, because the person he killed, was someone equally as upstanding and even more so in the society than he was?
I find the lack of mercy and justice and the abuse of the tools of justice, by the same proponents who attempt to make the case that their societies are not as civilized as developed countries and hence, the reason to employ the death penalty, a stark concern. And, I dare to say even further that the abuse of the justice mechanism, with the seemingly pervasiveness of pseudo democracy and lack of transparency in many developing countries, is a concern to be equally voiced in a time where the debate has reached Caribbean wide proportions.
Yes. I said it. Capital punishment in the Caribbean, has reached region wide debate. So, we may as well have a frank an open conversation about it, rather than acting as if these issues, are any different to any of us at any time or on any level. Especially the Anglo-phone Caribbean, who live by, basically, the same code of social conduct handed down to us by our former imperial powers. The same justice system, the same economic system and the same values for life. It's their handed down to us as a one size fit all institution, rather than a society built for our own common understanding on society.
While I have no decisive say in whether or not Jamaica or any other Caribbean country, goes the way of the noose. However, I can't help but sharpen the debate and get to the root theory and motivation behind using such a fatal device, in an attempt, I hope, to get the public to address the real issues with spiking murder rates and crime in general. And, it's not about the bible and it is not about the lack of moral values. It's something allot more stark, but the establishment does not readily face up to it, because it would display failure, perhaps on purpose, to provide basic functions made for a civil society--something where they espouse to be the vanguard of.
It's the economy stupid. No more and no less. Their is and will always be, spikes in the level of criminal activity, with the lack of resources and access to the resources, built for a comfortable human life. In some countries in Africa, corruption, on every level, is accepted because people have no other recourse to deal with their need to survive. Even the phenomenon of urbanization, has its root underpinnings in economic principles--if we are to appreciate the economy, from a greater extent than dollars and cents.
Crime and its linkages to the economy, is so patently obvious, until it pains me to have to write the bold and obvious in this article.
It would be refreshing for folks to face up to the fact that allot of issues, especially in regards to providing a safe, regulated and transparent economy, is out of their hands, or, above their heads and spheres of interest. It would be better to say it and then attempt to boldly bring people, your people, into a discussion on how to move forward with providing equity for all in the market. And you have to do something about it or it will get worse. Yes we can have punishment, but the murder of an innocent is a murder of an innocent. No amount of punishment can bring them back. If the people who are predisposed to crime in general can't eat, or, live to their fullest potential in an orderly society, "their" society, they will be forced to live to their potential outside of that orderly society. Point blank! Their is no fuzzy debate or wedge issue to bring up in regards to it. If you don't include, you exclude. Just so happens that the exclusion, is fatal--in many regards.
What can Caribbean countries do to sure up their economies? I don't have a ready made, cookie cutter response to that. If I did, I would have been making a mint as an economic and social adviser to many a leader in the world. It takes allot of work and thoughtfulness, however. Also however, the answer, is not found in a text book from Harvard and it is not found, in the mandate of the IMF and World Bank--the biggest think tanks in the world. It is found, rather, in the heart of a leader and with his love for his country, to put frameworks around the levels of economic activity within his or her country, to harness that, so people can feel included in their economic process.
Caribbean leadership has to continually be on the hustle for results in the market for all people. An all inclusive society and economy. It has to be their key issue of stewardship. People are literally dying out here and we have to begin taking it death serious. Caribbean countries need leadership, to say, without fear of backlash from the elite establishment and without fear of losing their authority to an increasing economically empowered electorate--and with the intelligence to do it-- "we need to get our economy more productive through total and wholesale domestic liberalization". Forget global liberalization. In fact, that would make issues worse. Open up the market for all and sundry in the domestic sense, first. That does not mean protectionism. But, it simply means liberalization. Not privatization through foreignization. But, true, domestic liberalization. It has to come before globalization in any event. At least it should!
Attractive little catch phrases come to mind when I say domestic liberalization. For example; "we have to create job's at home" or, "you have to buy domestic".
But, while it makes the issue rather simple, in actuality, it is what it is.
Support home base and all within. Or, they don't support you.
Youri
4 comments:
Youri:
You misunderstand how deterrence is measured.
Death Penalty and Deterrence: Let's be clear
by Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters, 0104
In their story, "States With No Death Penalty Share Lower Homicide Rates", The New York Times did their best to illustrate that the death penalty was not a deterrent, by showing that the average murder rate in death penalty states was higher than the average rate in non death penalty states and, it is. (1)
What the Times failed to observe is that their own study confirmed that you can't simply compare those averages to make that determination regarding deterrence.
As one observer stated: "The Times story does nothing more than repeat the dumbest of all dumb mistakes — taking the murder rate in a traditionally high-homicide state with capital punishment (like Texas) and comparing it to a traditionally low-homicide state with no death penalty (like North Dakota) and concluding that the death penalty doesn't work at all. Even this comparison doesn't work so well. The Times own graph shows Texas, where murder rates were 40 percent above Michigan's in 1991, has now fallen below Michigan . . .". (2)
Within the Times article, Michigan Governor John Engler states, "I think Michigan made a wise decision 150 years ago," referring to the state's abolition of the death penalty in 1846. "We're pretty proud of the fact that we don't have the death penalty."(3)
Even though easily observed on the Times' own graphics, they failed to mention the obvious. Michigan's murder rate is near or above that of 31 of the US's 38 death penalty states. And then, it should be recognized that Washington, DC (not found within the Times study) and Detroit, Michigan, two non death penalty jurisdictions, have been perennial leaders in murder and violent crime rates for the past 30 years. Delaware, a jurisdiction similar in size to them, leads the nation in executions per murder, but has significantly lower rates of murders and violent crime than do either DC or Detroit, during that same period.
Obviously, the Times study and any other simple comparison of jurisdictions with and without the death penalty, means little, with regard to deterrence.
Also revealed within the Times study, but not pointed out by them,: "One-third of the nation's executions take place in Texas—and the steepest decline in homicides has occurred in Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and Arkansas, which together account for nearly half the nation's executions." (4)
And, the Times also failed to mention that the major US jurisdiction with the most executions is Harris County (Houston, Texas), which has seen a 73% decrease in murder rates since resuming executions in 1982 -- possibly the largest reduction for a major metropolitan area since that time.
Also omitted from the Times review, although they had the data, is that during a virtual cessation of executions, from 1966-1980, that murders more than doubled in the US. Any other rise and fall in murders, after that time, has been only a fraction of that change, indicating a strong and direct correlation between the lack of executions and the dramatic increase in murders, if that is specifically what you are looking for.
If deterrence was measured by direct correlation's between execution, or the lack thereof, and murder rates, as implied by the Times article, and as wrongly assumed by those blindly accepting that model, then there would be no debate, only more confusion. Which may have been the Times' goal.
Let's take a look at the science.
Some non death penalty jurisdictions, such as South Africa and Mexico lead the world in murder and violent crime rates. But then some non death penalty jurisdictions, such as Sweden, have quite low rates. Then there are such death penalty jurisdictions as Japan and Singapore which have low rates of such crime. But then other death penalty jurisdictions, such as Rwanda and Louisiana, that have high rates.
To which an astute observer will respond: But socially, culturally, geographically, legally, historically and many other ways, all of those jurisdictions are very different. Exactly, a simple comparison of only execution rates and murder rates cannot tell the tale of deterrence. And within the US, between states, there exist many variables which will effect the rates of homicides.
See REVIEW, below
And, as so well illustrated by the Times graphics, a non death penalty state, such as Michigan has high murder rates and another non death penalty state, such as North Dakota, has low murder rates and then there are death penalty states, such as Louisiana, with high murder rates and death penalty states, such South Dakota, with low rates. Apparently, unbeknownst to the Times, but quite obvious to any neutral observer, there are other factors at play here, not just the presence or absence of the death penalty. Most thinking folks already knew that.
As Economics Professor Ehrlich stated in the Times piece and, as accepted by all knowledgeable parties, there are many factors involved in such evaluations. That is why there is a wide variation of crime rates both within and between some death penalty and non death penalty jurisdictions, and small variations within and between others. Any direct comparison of only execution rates and only murder rates, to determine deterrence, would reflect either ignorance or deception.
Ehrlich called the Times study "a throwback to the vintage 1960s statistical analyses done by criminologists who compared murder rates in neighboring states where capital punishment was either legal or illegal." "The statistics involved in such comparisons have long been recognized as devoid of scientific merit." He called the Times story a "one sided affair" devoid of merit. Most interesting is that Ehrlich was interviewed by the Time's writer, Fessenden, who asked Ehrlich to comment on the results before the story was published. Somehow Ehrlich's overwhelming criticisms were left out of the article.
Ehrlich also referred Fessenden to some professors who produced the recently released Emory study. Emory Economics department head, Prof. Deshbakhsh "says he was contacted by Fessenden, and he indicated to the Times reporter that the study suggested a very strong deterrent effect of capital punishment." Somehow,
Fessenden's left that out of the Times story, as well. (5).
There is a constant within all jurisdictions -- negative consequences will always have an effect on behavior.
Maybe the Times will be a bit more thoughtful, next time.
REVIEW
"The List: Murder Capitals of the World", 09/08, Foreign Policy Magazine
Capital punishment (cp) or not (ncp)
murder rates/100,000 population
4 out of the top 5 do not have the death penalty
1. Caracas (ncp), Venezuela 130-160
Bad policing.
2. New Orleans (cp), La, USA 69-95
Variable because of different counts in surging population. Drug related.
Nos 2 & 3 in US, Detroit (ncp), 46 and Baltimore (cp), 45.
3. Cape Town (ncp), South Africa 62
Most crimes with people who know each other.
4. Port Mores (ncp), Papua New Guinea 54
Chinese gangs, corrupt policing
5. Moscow (ncp), Russia 9.6
various
Of the Top 10 Countries With Lowest Murder Rates (1), 7 have the death penalty
O f the Top 10 Countries With Highest Murder Rates (2), 5 have the death penalty
Top 10 Countries With Lowest Murder Rates
Iceland 0.00 ncp
Senegal 0.33 ncp
Burkina Faso 0.38 cp
Cameroon 0.38 cp
Finland 0.71 ncp
Gambia 0.71 cp
Mali 0.71 cp
Saudi Arabia 0.71 cp
Mauritania 0.76 cp
Oman cp
Top 10 Countries With Highest Murder Rates
Honduras 154.02 ncp
South Africa 121.91 ncp
Swaziland 93.32 cp
Colombia 69.98 ncp
Lesotho 50.41 cp
Rwanda 45.08 ncp
Jamaica 37.21 cp
El. Salvador 36.88 cp
Venezuela 33.20 ncp
Bolivia 31.98 cp
(1) http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/countries-with-lowest-murder-rates.html no date
(2) http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/countries-with-highest-murder-rates.html no date
FOOTNOTES
1) "States With No Death Penalty Share Lower Homicide Rates", The New
York Times 9/22/00 located at
www (dot) nytimes.com/2000/09/22/national/22STUD.html and www (dot) nytimes.com/2000/09/22/national/22DEAT.html
2) “Don't Know Much About Calculus: The (New York) Times flunks high-school
math in death-penalty piece", William Tucker, National Review, 9/22/00, located
at www (dot) nationalreview.com/comment/comment092200c.shtml
3) ibid, see footnote 11
4) "The Death Penalty Saves Lives", AIM Report, August 2000, located atwww (dot) aim.org/publications/aim_report/2000/08a.html
5) "NEW YORK TIMES UNDER FIRE AGAIN", Accuracy in Media, 10/16/00, go to www (dot) aim.org/
copyright 2000-2008 Dudley Sharp: Permission for distribution of this document, in whole or in part, is approved with proper attribution.
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters
e-mail sharpjfa@aol.com, 713-622-5491,
Houston, Texas
Mr. Sharp has appeared on ABC, BBC, CBS, CNN, C-SPAN, FOX, NBC, NPR, PBS , VOA and many other TV and radio networks, on such programs as Nightline, The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, The O'Reilly Factor, etc., has been quoted in newspapers throughout the world and is a published author.
A former opponent of capital punishment, he has written and granted interviews about, testified on and debated the subject of the death penalty, extensively and internationally.
Pro death penalty sites
homicidesurvivors.com/categories/Dudley%20Sharp%20-%20Justice%20Matters.aspx
www.dpinfo.com
www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPinformation.htm
www.clarkprosecutor.org/html/links/dplinks.htm
www.coastda.com/archives.html
www.lexingtonprosecutor.com/death_penalty_debate.htm
www.prodeathpenalty.com
yesdeathpenalty.googlepages.com/home2 (Sweden)
www.wesleylowe.com/cp.html
The Death Penalty Provides More Protection for Innocents
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters, contact info below
Often, the death penalty dialogue gravitates to the subject of innocents at risk of execution. Seldom is a more common problem reviewed. That is, how innocents are more at risk without the death penalty.
To state the blatantly clear, living murderers, in prison, after release or escape, are much more likely to harm and murder, again, than are executed murderers.
Although an obvious truism, it is surprising how often folks overlook the enhanced incapacitation benefits of the death penalty over incarceration.
No knowledgeable and honest party questions that the death penalty has the most extensive due process protections in US criminal law.
Therefore, actual innocents are more likely to be sentenced to life imprisonment and more likely to die in prison serving under that sentence, that it is that an actual innocent will be executed.
That is. logically, conclusive.
16 recent studies, inclusive of their defenses, find for death penalty deterrence.
A surprise? No.
Life is preferred over death. Death is feared more than life.
Some believe that all studies with contrary findings negate those 16 studies. They don't. Studies which don't find for deterrence don't say no one is deterred, but that they couldn't measure those deterred.
What prospect of a negative outcome doesn't deter some? There isn't one . . . although committed anti death penalty folk may say the death penalty is the only one.
However, the premier anti death penalty scholar accepts it as a given that the death penalty is a deterrent, but does not believe it to be a greater deterrent than a life sentence. Yet, the evidence is compelling and un refuted that death is feared more than life.
Some death penalty opponents argue against death penalty deterrence, stating that it's a harsher penalty to be locked up without any possibility of getting out.
Reality paints a very different picture.
What percentage of capital murderers seek a plea bargain to a death sentence? Zero or close to it. They prefer long term imprisonment.
What percentage of convicted capital murderers argue for execution in the penalty phase of their capital trial? Zero or close to it. They prefer long term imprisonment.
What percentage of death row inmates waive their appeals and speed up the execution process? Nearly zero. They prefer long term imprisonment.
This is not, even remotely, in dispute.
Life is preferred over death. Death is feared more than life.
Furthermore, history tells us that lifers have many ways to get out: Pardon, commutation, escape, clerical error, change in the law, etc.
In choosing to end the death penalty, or in choosing not implement it, some have chosen to spare murderers at the cost of sacrificing more innocent lives.
Furthermore, possibly we have sentenced 25 actually innocent people to death since 1973, or 0.3% of those so sentenced. Those have all been released upon post conviction review. The anti death penalty claims, that the numbers are significantly higher, are a fraud, easily discoverable by fact checking.
The innocents deception of death penalty opponents has been getting exposure for many years. Even the behemoth of anti death penalty newspapers, The New York Times, has recognized that deception.
To be sure, 30 or 40 categorically innocent people have been released from death row . . . (1) This when death penalty opponents were claiming the release of 119 "innocents" from death row. Death penalty opponents never required actual innocence in order for cases to be added to their "exonerated" or "innocents" list. They simply invented their own definitions for exonerated and innocent and deceptively shoe horned large numbers of inmates into those definitions - something easily discovered with fact checking.
There is no proof of an innocent executed in the US, at least since 1900.
If we accept that the best predictor of future performance is past performance, we can, reasonably, conclude that the DNA cases will be excluded prior to trial, and that for the next 8000 death sentences, that we will experience a 99.8% accuracy rate in actual guilt convictions. This improved accuracy rate does not include the many additional safeguards that have been added to the system, over and above DNA testing.
Of all the government programs in the world, that put innocents at risk, is there one with a safer record and with greater protections than the US death penalty?
Unlikely.
Full report -All Innocence Issues: The Death Penalty, upon request.
Full report - The Death Penalty as a Deterrent, upon request
(1) The Death of Innocents: A Reasonable Doubt,
New York Times Book Review, p 29, 1/23/05, Adam Liptak,
national legal correspondent for The NY Times
copyright 2007-2008, Dudley Sharp
Permission for distribution of this document, in whole or in part, is approved with proper attribution.
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters
e-mail sharpjfa@aol.com 713-622-5491,
Houston, Texas
Mr. Sharp has appeared on ABC, BBC, CBS, CNN, C-SPAN, FOX, NBC, NPR, PBS, VOA and many other TV and radio networks, on such programs as Nightline, The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, The O'Reilly Factor, etc., has been quoted in newspapers throughout the world and is a published author.
A former opponent of capital punishment, he has written and granted interviews about, testified on and debated the subject of the death penalty, extensively and internationally.
Hi Dudley,
Very lengthy post. In fact, it rivals mine in content and very well sourced. I thank you for coming on and sharing your view. Great additional information as well.
However, I would have to deal with your first post, and not the second, because, the points you propose are mine in the second post; fear of life or death; letting a convicted murder out for any reason and; any idea that the concept of letting an innocent hang for a crime he/she did not commit...are certainly not mine and not a stream of thought, I ascribe to in regards to the death penalty debate.
To me, those issues, are neither here nor there. And, I can share your concern, with anti-death proponents, who espouse those views. While ultimately my position is to be humane to all and however poignant or salient to the issue those issues may or may not be, the matter of "not" creating more criminals, before we decide to hang criminals, is the crux of my argument--especially in the Caribbean, where economics and crime are more than related, in my view. (When I say economics, I mean wealth and access to education and wealth creating tools and resources.)
To say again, the matter of those streams of thought, are not considerations to be taken to merit in my analysis, is something I want to stress vigorously.
To the first post:
I have an issue with your representation of the facts on the state of Delaware. Delaware, is no where near Mich and/or Texas in regards to population or demographics. In fact, Delaware, can be easily said to be one of the welathiest states in the union, aside from Connecticut and New Hampshire. Proving my point that there is room for my argument to stand on the economic issues of crime--no taxes and all.
New Hampshire is by far one of the wealthiest, but also has the lowest crime statistics. They also have the death penalty, but the other ten before it, as equally distributed by the ratio per person and state size, have little or no crime as well and on any given year, the top 10 can be changed around. Proving my point to any argument that you can pin point, yes or no, that crime and capital punishment are correlated.
While to economics in the "USA" in regards to crime may prove to shallow in the boundaries I lay out. However, living standards and cultural components and values, certainly have to factor in in regards to explanations--with evidence of the death penalty, or not.
While DC has the highest by state of personal income, the personal income is not evenly distributed and crime, in the surrounding poor areas are concentrated to the poor ghetto's that surround the money making capital. 1
Also, your point on Delaware is slightly misleading. Delaware has had 14 murders since 1996. 2
Also, to continue your expression of Texas, a state with one of the highest murder rates and your comparison of Harrison county as having the highest "capital punishment" to "low murder ratio", also leads us back to the issue of other states like New York, who's crime rates go up and down, as does Harrison county or any other county/state, in regards to crime and murder. This is simply the type of argument that is debunked as inconsistent with any nationwide statistical correlation on capital punishment and murder.
Also with Harrison county, the analysis neglects population shifts and detection rates, due to populatuion shifts, which can eqaully account for high capture and at the same time, lower crime rates--Texas, is a very mobile and shifting state, in regards to persons moving to and within the state, from a lower economic and sub-urban concentration to a higher.
It simply will never add up, to prove with a shadow of a doubt that the death penalty, is a deterent.
Actually, Maine has a lower murder rate than does Delaware, and they are evenly comparable in ethnic and cultural and economic makeup. 3 They also have no death penalty.
Thanks for posting.
Youri
Resources
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highest-income_states_in_the_United_States
2. http://doc.delaware.gov/information/deathrow_factsheet.shtml
3. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-1996-2007
All of what you wrote means that you missed the point of the essay.
Based upon what yiou wrote, we, partially, agree.
The point was all of these jurisdicitons are very diverse and that there are many factors which will affect murder rates, not just the imposition of the death penalty.
That was the point of the essay.
All prospects of a negative outcome deter some. There is no exception.
Execution is the most severe criminal sanction - the most severe negative outcome for criminals.
You say there is no deterrence. Really?
Prove that the most severe criminal sanction, execution, deters no one.
The thought is absurd. Even in studies where deterrence is not found, no one says "no one was deterred". They say we could not detect deterrence.
Even the most celebrated anti death penalty academic in the US, Hugo Bedau concedes of course the death penalty deters. But, he conyinues that he finds no proof that it deters more than a life sentence.
However, the evidence is quite solid that it is a greater deterrent.
Post a Comment