Thursday, July 09, 2009

Death Penalty Polls - Support Remains Very High - 80%

Death Penalty Polls - Support Remains Very High - 80%
April, 2009 - updated 9/2021
 
From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   

======
Death Penalty Support 72-86% depending upon question (8/2021)
New Evidence of Broad Support for Death Penalty | RealClearPolicy
Joseph M. Bessette & J. Andrew Sinclair, RealClearPolicy August 16, 2021 
======
 
This study reflects well known polls, for the last 15 years, proving much higher  death penalty support than by the oft quoted, much less accurate Gallup.

When polls correctly ask about true capital, death penalty eligible murders, support is around 80%.

Most familiar polls wrongly ask a variation of "Do you support the death penalty for murder?", usually getting replies in the 60-75% range.

However, in the US, the death penalty is only allowed for those who commit capital murders. Therefore, all polls, which only refer to murders are irrelevant when asking about death penalty support.

Death penalty support is much deeper and much wider than we are often led to believe.

Death penalty support for relevant capital, death penalty eligible murders

81% of the American people supported the execution of Timothy McVeigh, with only 16% opposed. "(T)his view appears to be the consensus of all major groups in society, including men, women, whites, nonwhites, "liberals" and "conservatives." (Gallup 5/2/01).

85% of Connecticut respondents voiced support for serial/rapist murderer Michael Ross' "voluntary" execution. (Quinnipiac University Poll, January 12, 2005). This is the best example of a death penalty poll I have seen, regarding how polling results change, based upon the way a question is asked.

79% support the death penalty for terrorists (Survey USA News Poll #12074, Sponsor: WABC-TV New York, 4/26/2007 New York State poll)

"78% of (Nebraska's) 3,232 respondents said they supported the death penalty for “heinous crimes.” 16% opposed. ". . . a nearly identical number (76%) said they opposed legislation that would abolish the death penalty. ("Survey Shows Statewide Support for Death Penalty", MPB Public Affairs Poll, 2/14/08)

73% of Connecticut voters support the death penalty for the two parolees accused of the Cheshire (Ct) home invasion rape/murders of a mother and her two daughters. While 63% of Connecticut voters support the death penalty for murderers, in general, AT THE SAME TIME. ("Connecticut Voters Support Death Penalty 2-1", Quinnipiac University Poll, 11/7/07). NOTE: Support is actually greater than 3 to 1. The poll showed 73% for execution, 23% opposed, for those parolees. It was 63-27% for the general question.


82% of those in the US favored of executing Saddam Hussein (French daily Le Monde, 12/2006{1}), also in
Great Britain: 69%
France: 58%
Germany: 53%
Spain: 51%
Italy: 46%


We are led to believe there isn't death penalty support in England or Europe. European governments won't allow executions when their populations support it: they're anti democratic. (2)

Why is the "error rate" so large between the general murder question and specific, death penalty eligible murders?

Likely, it is due to several factors:
(1) the reluctance of some respondents to voice stronger support for the death penalty, unless specific examples of murderers and their crimes are provided. All of the above polls reflect that.;
(2) the widespread media coverage of anti death penalty claims, without the balance of contradicting those false claims, producing lower general support (The 130 death row "innocents" scam is a perfect example); and
(3) the absence of that influence from (2) when looking at individual cases, when the public knows the crimes, the guilt of the murderer and absent the anti death penalty bias factor, thus producing much higher specific case support, also reflected in the polls, above.

Death Penalty Opposition? Look Again.

Significant percentages of those who say the oppose the death penalty, in general, do, in fact, support that sanction for truly death eligible crimes. This provides firm evidence that death penalty support is much wider and deeper than expressed with the answers to the general and improper death penalty polling questions.

57% of those who say they oppose the death penalty, generally, actually do support it for McVeigh's execution (81% supported the execution of McVeigh, 16% opposed (Gallup 5/02/01), while 65% offer general support for executions for "murder", with 28% opposed (Gallup, 6/10/01). The polls were conducted at nearly the same time.

40% who say they oppose the death penalty, generally, actually do support it for terrorists. (79% support and 18% oppose the death penalty for terrorists. 67% support and 29% oppose the death penalty for "murder".) (SAME POLL - Survey USA News Poll #12074, Sponsor: WABC-TV New York, 4/26/2007 New York State poll)

84% of those who, generally, say they oppose the death penalty, in general, actual did support it for Michael Ross. (SAME POLL - 85% say Connecticut serial rapist/murderer Michael Ross should be allowed to waive appeals and be executed. When asked whether they favor or oppose the death penalty, 59% favor - 31% oppose (Quinnipiac University Poll, January 12, 2005).

NOTE: The percentages will likely have a range of change, instead of a specific percentage, because there would be a transfer of points, not just from those opposing, under the general question, but from the undecided" or "did not answer" group, as well, into the supportive group for specific murders.


Distortion: Death Penalty vs Life Without Parole Polls

When responding to this question: “If you could choose between the following two approaches, which do you think is the better penalty for murder: the death penalty (or) life imprisonment, with absolutely no possibility of parole?”, Gallup found:

47% for the death penalty, 48% for life without parole, (Gallup, May 2006).

Some, including Gallup and Quinnipiac, speculate that this represents lower support for the death penalty. Such improper and inaccurate speculation cannot be justified and is an unethical use of pollsters' opinion.

First error: Neither respondent group is saying do away with the other sanction or that they oppose the other sanction. What it does mean is that 95% of US citizens support the death penalty and/or life without parole for murderers. It could also mean that 90% of all respondents support both sanctions, particularly when properly using capital murders.

For example, "Which do you think is better - vanilla ice cream or chocolate ice cream?" 50% prefer chocolate, 45% vanilla. However, 92% actually like both vanilla and chocolate ice cream - with a slightly lower percentage liking vanilla, marginally less. 99% of respondents don't want either ice cream banned. 1% were undecided.

Second error: This polling question is highly prejudicial, which wrongly influences the answers. This has become commonplace.

"Absolutely" no possibility of parole (release) doesn't exist.

What is absolute is that the executive branch can reduce sentences and the legislature can change the laws and make them retroactive, if it benefits the criminal, thereby offering two avenues for parole in "absolutely" no-parole cases.

Therefore, the polling question offers a false premise which, obviously, distorts the answers. Gallup has been made aware of this for some time.

Third error: By law and in the context of the death penalty, it cannot be a choice of either only a death sentence or only a life sentence, as Gallup wrongly poses. Constitutionally, the death penalty cannot be mandatory. Therefore, at least two sentencing options must always be provided to jurors in a death penalty eligible case.

Therefore, the polling question begins with 3 false premises, all of which wrongly effect the poll.

Gallup did not ask this misleading question in 2007, 2008 or 2009. I hope they did so because of theses error issues and will not resume it.

Fourth error: Inexcusably, Gallup wrongly continues to mention the previous results of this highly misleading poll.

If you are searching for a true life vs death penalty choice, the poll question should be in the context of true death penalty eligible murders, such as:

For the rape and murder of children do you prefer the punishment options of
1) Life without parole, excluding, in all cases, the death penalty? or
2) Giving the jury the option of selecting either the death penalty or life without parole?

This has the benefit of reflecting reality, as opposed to the distorted fiction of Gallup's (and others') current life sentence vs death penalty polling. The death penalty cannot be a punishment option, without also having life or other options and the death penalty is case specific to capital murders.

Conclusion

Death penalty support is much deeper and much wider than we are often led to believe, with significant percentages of those who say they, generally, oppose the death penalty, actually supporting it when it is a true death eligible crime.

There is 82% death penalty support in the US, as recently as December 2006. Even one of the most liberal US states, Connecticut, has shown very strong support for specific, death eligible case executions - 85% (2005), 73% (2007).

95% of US citizens support the death penalty and/or life without parole for murderers. Therefore, we already have the most democratic approach - we give jurors and judges the choice between those two sentences in capital eligible cases.

Copyright 2005-2021 Dudley Sharp, Permission for distribution of this document, in whole or part, is approved, with proper attribution.

Dudley Sharp
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

essays http://homicidesurvivors.com/categories/Dudley%20Sharp%20-%20Justice%20Matters.aspx

http://www.dpinfo.com
http://www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPinformation.htm
http://www.clarkprosecutor.org/html/links/dplinks.htm
http://prodpinNC.blogspot.com/
http://www.coastda.com/archives.html
http://www.lexingtonprosecutor.com/death_penalty_debate.htm
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com
http://yesdeathpenalty.googlepages.com/home2 (Sweden)
http://www.wesleylowe.com/cp.html



(1) The recent results of a poll conducted by Novatris/Harris for the French daily Le Monde on the death penalty shocked the editors and writers at Germany's left-leaning SPIEGEL ONLINE (Dec. 22, 2006). When asked whether they favored the death penalty for Saddam Hussein, a majority of respondents in Germany, France and Spain responded in the affirmative.

(2)An excellent article, “Death in Venice: Europe’s Death-penalty Elitism", details this anti democratic position (The New Republic, by Joshua Micah Marshall, 7/31/2000). Another situation reflects this same mentality. "(Pres. Mandela says 'no' to reinstating the death penalty in South Africa - Nelson Mandela against death penalty though 93% of public favors it, according to poll. "(JET, 10/14/96). Pres. Mandela explained that ". . . it was necessary to inform the people about other strategies the government was using to combat crime." As if the people didn't understand. South Africa has had some of the highest crime rates in the world in the ten years, since Mandela's comments. "The number of murders committed each year in the country is as high as 47,000, according to Interpol statistics." As of 2006, 72% of South Africans want the death penalty back. ("South Africans Support Death Penalty", 5/14/2006, Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research

NOTE: Some recent polls - with no mention of specific crimes.

97%+ of Guatemalans support the death penalty. 2.6% oppose
(telephone survey, newspaper Prensa Libre, 2/14/08)
www.latinamericapress.org/article.asp?lanCode=1&artCode=5545

79% support the resumption of hanging in Jamaica. 16% oppose. (Bill Johnson Polling for The Gleaner (Jamaica) Newspaper, 1/12-13/08

Two-thirds of Czechs for death penalty reintroduction - poll
Prague- Almost two-thirds of Czechs believe that death penalty should exist in the Czech Republic, while one-third believes the opposite, according to a poll the CVVM agency conducted in May and released. June 12, 2008, Ceskenoviny.cz/news/
 
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
====== 
======
 
Additional research, w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of everyone.  
 
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
======
 
Partial CV

Sunday, July 05, 2009

Death Penalty Support: Modern Catholic Scholars

Death Penalty Support: Modern Catholic Scholars
Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom

There are thoughtful writings on both sides of this debate, but the pro death penalty side is stronger.

Even today, a Catholic in good standing can call for more executions, if their prudential judgement finds for that.

NOTE: Additional secular and additional Christian essays, are linked or referenced, below.

1) Avery Cardinal Dulles:

This recently deceased US Cardinal, in one of his final interviews (2006, published 2008), states that he thought the Church may return to a "more traditional posture" on the death penalty (and just war).

"Recent popes, Dulles conceded, beginning with John XXIIII, seem to have taken quasi-abolitionist positions on both matters. Yet used sparingly and with safeguards to protect the interests of justice, Dulles argued, both the death penalty and war have, over the centuries, been recognized by the church as legitimate, sometimes even obligatory, exercises of state power. The momentum of "internal solidification," he said, may lead to some reconsideration of these social teachings." (1)

Based upon the strength of the Catholic biblical, theological and traditional support for the death penalty as, partially, revealed, below, I think the Church will have to.

======
The Catholic Church & The Death Penalty
13 (15) Factual Errors: 2018 CCC 2267 amendment
======

2) Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J., considered one of the most prominent Roman Catholic theologians of the 20th century.

"There are certain moral norms that have always and everywhere been held by the successors of the Apostles in communion with the Bishop of Rome. Although never formally defined, they are irreversibly binding on the followers of Christ until the end of the world." "Such moral truths are the grave sinfulness of contraception and direct abortion. Such, too, is the Catholic doctrine which defends the imposition of the death penalty." (2)

"Most of the Church's teaching, especially in the moral order, is infallible doctrine because it belongs to what we call her ordinary universal magisterium." (2)

"Equally important is the Pope's (Pius XII) insistence that capital punishment is morally defensible in every age and culture of Christianity." " . . . the Church's teaching on 'the coercive power of legitimate human authority' is based on 'the sources of revelation and traditional doctrine.' It is wrong, therefore 'to say that these sources only contain ideas which are conditioned by historical circumstances.' On the contrary, they have 'a general and abiding validity.' (Acta Apostolicae Sedis, 1955, pp 81-2)." (2)

======
Catechism & State Protection: The Gross Negligence of the Holy See
======

3) Romano Amerio, a faithful Catholic Vatican insider, scholar, professor at the Academy of Lugano, consultant to the Preparatory Commission of Vatican II, and a peritus (expert theologian) at the Council.

"The most irreligious aspect of this argument against capital punishment is that it denies its expiatory value which, from a religious point of view, is of the highest importance because it can include a final consent to give up the greatest of all worldly goods. This fits exactly with St. Thomas’s opinion that as well as canceling out any debt that the criminal owes to civil society, capital punishment can cancel all punishment due in the life to come. His thought is . . . Summa, 'Even death inflicted as a punishment for crimes takes away the whole punishment due for those crimes in the next life, or a least part of that punishment, according to the quantities of guilt, resignation and contrition; but a natural death does not.' The moral importance of wanting to make expiation also explains the indefatigable efforts of the Confraternity of St. John the Baptist Beheaded, the members of which used to accompany men to their deaths, all the while suggesting, begging and providing help to get them to repent and accept their deaths, so ensuring that they would die in the grace of God, as the saying went." (3)

Some opposing capital punishment " . . . go on to assert that a life should not be ended because that would remove the possibility of making expiation, is to ignore the great truth that capital punishment is itself expiatory. In a humanistic religion expiation would of course be primarily the converting of a man to other men. On that view, time is needed to effect a reformation, and the time available should not be shortened. In God’s religion, on the other hand, expiation is primarily a recognition of the divine majesty and lordship, which can be and should be recognized at every moment, in accordance with the principle of the concentration of one’s moral life." (3)

Some death penalty opponents "deny the expiatory value of death; death which has the highest expiatory value possible among natural things, precisely because life is the highest good among the relative goods of this world; and it is by consenting to sacrifice that life, that the fullest expiation can be made. And again, the expiation that the innocent Christ made for the sins of mankind was itself effected through his being condemned to death." (3)

======

Related Topics

The Death Penalty: Mercy, Expiation, Redemption & Salvation

Saint (& Pope) Pius V, "The just use of (executions), far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this (Fifth) Commandment which prohibits murder." "The Roman Catechism of the Council of Trent" (1566).
Pope Pius XII: "When it is a question of the execution of a man condemned to death it is then reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned of the benefit of life, in expiation of his fault, when already, by his fault, he has dispossessed himself of the right to live." 9/14/52.

Jesus and the Death Penalty

Pro Life: The Death Penalty

All other issues addressed, here

======
3300+ pro death penalty quotes, from some of the greatest thinkers in history, inclusive of 600+ quotes from victims' families
====== 


4) "Catholic and other Christian References: Support for the Death Penalty", at
www.homicidesurvivors.com/2006/10/12/catholic-and-other-christian-references-support-for-the-death-penalty.aspx


5) John Stuart Mill, speech on the death penalty
http://web.mnstate.edu/gracyk/courses/web%20publishing/Mill_supports_death_penalty.htm


6) Pope John Paul II: Prudential Judgement and the death penalty
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2007/07/23/pope-john-paul-ii-his-death-penalty-errors.aspx


7) "Capital Punishment: A Catholic Perspective", by Br. Augustine (Emmanuel Valenza)
http://archives.sspx.org/against_sound_bites/capital_punishment.htm


8) "The Right of Punishing", Immanuel Kant,
http://acad.depauw.edu/~jeremyanderson/old/120s05/120z_kant.html


9) "Capital Punishment: What the Bible Says", Dr. Lloyd R. Bailey, Abingdon Press, 1987. The definitive biblical review of the death penalty.

see approved synopsis, paragraph numbered 30, within

http://www.homicidesurvivors.com/2006/10/12/catholic-and-other-christian-references-support-for-the-death-penalty.aspx

excerpt:

All interpretations, contrary to the biblical support of capital punishment, are false.  Interpreters ought to listen to the Bible's own agenda, rather than to squeeze from it implications for their own agenda. As the ancient rabbis taught, "Do not seek to be more righteous than your Creator.'  (Ecclesiastes Rabbah 7.33.).

Listen carefully to the Bible as the Word of God rather than seek to improve upon it by means of human values. However meritorious mercy may be, however abundantly evident it may be in God's own dealings, murder was an offense for which mercy and pity were not allowed and for which monetary compensation was strictly forbidden. The sentence is set by God's torah and a judge cannot have discretion in this matter. Murder is something utterly on its own, nothing can be compared to it.


10) "What Do Murderers Deserve?" by David Gelernter (unabomber victim & Yale U. Computer Professor), Commentary Magazine, April 1998
Reprint, Utne Reader, March/April 1999, http://www.utne.com/1999-03-01/WhatdoMurderersDeserve.aspx

NOTE Gelernter ERROR: Karla Faye Tucker did not, voluntarily, end her appeals


11) "Capital Punishment: The Case for Justice", Prof. J. Budziszewski, First Things, August / September 2004 found at
http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles4/BudziszewskiPunishment.shtml


12) "Defending Capital Punishment" by William Gairdner
http://www.williamgairdner.com/defending-capital-punishment/


13) "Why I Support Capital Punishment", by Andrew Tallman, sections 1-6 secular review, sections 7-11 biblical review,
http://andrewtallmanshowarticles.blogspot.com/search?q=Capital+punishment


14) "THE ULTIMATE PUNISHMENT: A DEFENSE", Ernest van den Haag, Harvard Law Review, 1986
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/angel/procon/haagarticle.html


15) "The Death Penalty", by Solange Strong Hertz at http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/archive-death%20penalty.htm


16) "A Seamless Garment In a Sinful World" by John R. Connery, S. J., America, 7/14/84, p 5-8).


17) "God’s Justice and Ours" by US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, First Things, 5/2002
http://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=2022


18) "The Purpose of Punishment (in the Catholic tradition)", by R. Michael Dunningan, J.D., J.C.L., CHRISTIFIDELIS, Vol.21,No.4, sept 14, 2003
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7453


19) Chapter V:The Sanctity of Life, "Principles of Conduct: Aspects of Biblical Ethics" By John Murray, 1991 (first published 1957) by Wm. B. Eerdmans http://tiny.cc/4SFBY

20) "MOST CATHOLICS OPPOSE CAPITAL PUNISHMENT?", KARL KEATING'S E-LETTER, Catholic Answers, March 2, 2004
http://www.catholic.com/newsletters/kke_040302.asp


21) "THOUGHTS ON THE BISHOPS' MEETING: NOWADAYS, VOTERS IGNORE BISHOPS", KARL KEATING'S E-LETTER, Catholic Answers, 11/22/05
http://www.catholic.com/newsletters/kke_051122.asp


22) Forgotten Truths: "Is The Church Against Abortion and The Death Penalty" Luiz Sergio Solimeo, Crusade Magazine, p14-16, May/June 2007
http://www.tfp.org/tfp-home/news-commentary/is-the-church-against-both-abortion-and-the-death-penalty.html


23) "Just Violence: An Aristotelian Justification of Capital Punishment"
http://www.csuchico.edu/pst/JustViolence.htm


Personal Note: I support the death penalty because it is a just and deserved sanction - the same foundation as for all legal sanctions. Secondarily, the death penalty is a greater protector of innocent lives. The moral difference between those who oppose or support capital punishment is that one finds it morally wrong, the other morally correct, respectively. Do we execute because we value life? Societies imprison criminals because we value freedom so much. A sanction is only a sanction when we take away that which is valued.

======


The Death Penalty: Do Innocents Matter?


=======

Victim's Voices - These are the murder victims

FOOTNOTES

1) "An unpublished interview with Avery Dulles", All Things Catholic by John L. Allen, Jr., NCRcafe.org, Posted on Dec 19, 2008, at
http://ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic/unpublished-interview-avery-dulles  


2) "Capital Punishment: New Testament Teaching", Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J., 1998
http://www.therealpresence.org/archives/Sacred_Scripture/Sacred_Scripture_014.htm


3) "Amerio on capital punishment ", Chapter XXVI, 187. The death penalty, from the book Iota Unum, May 25, 2007 ,
http://www.domid.blogspot.com/2007/05/amerio-on-capital-punishment.html


about Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.
http://www.mariancatechist.com/html/general/stjohnhardon.htm
http://www.therealpresence.org/archives/archives.htm
http://www.mariancatechist.com/html/general/fatherhardon.htm
http://www.saintphilomena.com/newpage4.htm
http://credo.stormloader.com/Saints/hardon.htm

about Romano Amerio
http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/176565?eng=y
http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2006/02/romano-amerio-and-pope-benedict.html
http://www.latin-mass-society.org/2007/romanoamerio.html
http://www.angeluspress.org/oscatalog/item/6700/iota-unum  
 
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
====== 
======
 
Additional research, w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of everyone.  
 
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
======
 
Partial CV


Thursday, July 02, 2009

Deterrence and the Death Penalty: A Reply to Radelet and Lacock

Deterrence and the Death Penalty: A Reply to Radelet and Lacock
Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom

Subject:"Do Executions Lower Homicide Rates? The Views of Leading Criminologists", by Michael Radelet, Traci Lacock (1)

There appears to be a lot of confusion, with regard to the actual findings of the subject review/survey (hereinafter "Survey").

SOME REALITY

Within this Survey, the response to question 12 finds that 92% of the criminologists agree that the death penalty may deter some.

It is a rational conclusion. All prospects of a negative outcome/consequence deter the behavior of some. It is a truism. 

The responses to question 8 found that 61% (or 46) of the criminologists found some support for the deterrent effects of the death penalty through the empirical, social science studies.

16 (now 24) recent studies, since 1996, inclusive of their defenses (2), find for death penalty deterrence. These studies find executions deter from 1-28 murders per execution.

Life is preferred over death. Death is feared more than life. No surprise.

If your public policy question is "Does the death penalty deter?" The answer is "Of course it does."

Game over? Not quite.

Can we accurately and convincingly measure how many innocent lives are spared because of the deterrent effect of the death penalty? Unlikely. Social sciences are not exact sciences. Even if all protocols and data are sound, results will still vary from study to study. This public policy debate is so contentious, in academia, as elsewhere, that there will always be some disagreement over methodology and results. Therefore, the "convincingly" will always be problematic with such studies.

The question is not "Does the death penalty deter?" It does. The question is "Will there every be full agreement on how much the death penalty deters?" There won't be.

THE CURIOUS CASE OF RADELET/LACOCK

The first three survey questions are specific to murder rates and deterrence. Both reason and social science have known, for a very long time, that murder rates are not how deterrence is established.

For example, look at crime rates. Some jurisdictions have high crime rates, some low - from year to year crime rates go up, down or stay, roughly, the same. In all of those circumstances, we know that some potential criminals are deterred from committing crimes.

It is the same with all which deters, inclusive of the death penalty. Whether murder rates go up or down, whether they are high or low, there will be fewer net murders with the death penalty and more net murders without it.

Would Radelet/Lacock or the criminologists say that no criminals are deterred because one jurisdiction has higher crime rates than another or because crime rates have risen? Of course not. It would be silly to even suggest such a thing.

But it appears that is what Radelt/Lacock are trying to do with their first three questions. It's nonsense.

Questions 4 and 5 deal with political implications, which have no relevance to deterrence.

Statement 6 "The death penalty significantly reduces the number of homicides". Nearly 57% (or 43) of criminologists said the statement was totally inaccurate.

How do the authors quantify a "significant reduction" in murders? They don't. Therefore, no one has a clue as to what the authors or respondents meant.

How many innocent lives saved by deterrence is insignificant? There is no insignificant number.

One deterred is significant if it is your child's life saved. Is 2-5 innocents saved per year or per execution a significant reduction? 11-25, 112-210, 1800-2800? What is a "significant reduction" in homicides for these 43 criminologists?

There is a reason Radelet/Lacock didn't say: "The death penalty deters no one." No one can rationally, or truthfully, make such a statement.

Question 7 regards whether the death penalty is a stronger deterrent to homicide than a life sentence. 91%, or a total of 67, of the criminologists said no.

Even if the death penalty is only equal in value as a life sentence, as a deterrent, then the death penalty is an important deterrent.

There are several major tiebreakers in this "equality".

First, look at those murderers who were not deterred. About 99.9% of all of those murderers who face the death penalty either plea bargain to a life sentence, go to trial, seeking a life sentence, argue for life, not death, in the punishment phase of their trials and fight a, seemingly, never ending appellate battle to stay alive while they are on death row.

If 99.9% of death penalty eligible murderers not deterred, tell us they fear execution more than life, what about those more reasoned, potential murderers, who have chosen not to murder? Is it possible that they, like most of us, prefer life over death and fear death more than life?

Of course, execution is more of a deterrent than life.

Secondly, there are a number of real life stories of potential murderers who have stated that it was the death penalty that prevented them from committing murder. This is known as the individual deterrent effect. In these cases, the death penalty was an enhanced deterrent over a life sentence, just as the first example found. In addition, individual, enhanced deterrence cannot exist without general, enhanced deterrence. Therefore, there is a general, enhanced deterrent.

Thirdly, if we are unsure about deterrence, there is no "equality" in the results of our choices.

If there is deterrence and we execute, we save innocent lives via deterrence and by preventing murderers from ever harming again. If there is deterrence and we fail to execute, we sacrifice more innocent lives by reduced deterrence and, additionally, put more innocents at risk, because living murderers are always more likely to harm again, than are executed ones. If there is no deterrence and we execute, we protect more innocents because of enhanced incapacitation. If there is no deterrence and we don't execute, more innocents are at risk because the murderer is still alive.

The weight of the evidence is that the death penalty is an enhanced deterrent over a life sentence and any deterrence is significant for many of us.

There is a reason Radelet/Lacock didn't ask: "Can you prove the death penalty does not deter some who were not deterred by a life sentence?" Answer: Of course not.

Radelet/Lacock may misinterpret how important deterrence is to the argument for capital punishment.

No one can support the death penalty, solely, because of deterrence, because they first must find the sanction just and deserved. Just ask anyone that says they support the death penalty solely because of deterrence: "If you didn't find the person deserved the death penalty, would you still support their execution because of deterrence?"

80% of those polled in the US support the death penalty for death eligible, capital murders. (3)

The Survey review appears to agree that deterrence is not much of a foundation for death penalty support. Folks support the death penalty because it is a just and appropriate sanction for the crimes committed - the same reason they support all legal sanctions.

However, Radelet/Lacock overlooked that death penalty deterrence appears to be a significant threat to anti-death penalty folks. That is because a deterrent effect will mean that in achieving their goals anti-death penalty folks will be sparing the lives of murderers, at the cost of more innocents murdered. It is a tough result for anti- death penalty folks who find themselves with a terrible dilemma.

The death penalty saves lives, in at least three ways, over a life sentence, - enhanced incapacitation, enhanced due process and enhanced deterrence. Yet, those benefits remain secondary to execution being a just and appropriate sanction for some murders.

LOOK DEEPER

Pretend that there is an imaginary world where the evidence is completely neutral on the effects of negative prospects, where there is no evidence of what incentives mean to behavior.

Do we have two equally balanced prospects? The death penalty/executions deter and the death penalty/executions don't deter.

This prospect is neither inconclusive nor equally balanced, because you have a prospect between sparing innocent life, via death penalty/execution deterrence or a prospect of death penalty/execution, with no deterrence, but enhanced incapacitation.

If deterrence is inconclusive, the prospect of saving innocent lives is not.

Let's look at what criminologists are not saying. They are not saying "The death penalty deters no one." They can't. Reason, common sense and human experience all find that the prospects of a negative outcome/consequence deter some. It is a truism.

Why would the most severe criminal sanction be the only one that doesn't deter some? It wouldn't be.

All legal sanctions deter some.

This debate is often turned backwards, with anti-death penalty folks saying "There is no deterrent effect of the death penalty." or asking "Can you prove there is a deterrent effect?"

As all prospects of a negative outcome/consequence deter some, the burden of proof is not on those who say the death penalty deters, but on those who say it does not. Can death penalty opponents prove that the death penalty does not deter some? Of course not.

What social science conflicts with the notion that the potential for negative outcomes/consequences restrains the behavior of some? There are none. Execution is the most serious negative outcome/consequence that a murderer may face.

SOME NOTES ABOUT BIAS

This Survey was funded by Sheilah's Fund at the Tides Foundation in San Francisco and was arranged through the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) in Washington, D.C.

The Tides Foundation Death Penalty Mobilization Fund's sole purpose is the end of the death penalty. Sheilah's Fund is a direct contributor to anti-death penalty efforts, as well.

The DPIC is one of the leading anti-death penalty groups in the US and, in my opinion, is one of the most deceptive.

Prof. Radelet has been one of the most active anti-death penalty activists for decades.

Jeffrey Fagan is an ASC Fellow and has been an anti-death penalty activist for decades.

For context and perspective, it is important to look at the recent past and current positions of the American Society of Criminology (ASC).

Not long ago, the subtitle to the ASC Death Penalty Resources page was “Anti-Capital Punishment Resources”. They were a proud anti-death penalty organization. As today, ASC listed few, if any, capital punishment resources which had a positive view of the death penalty.

If you visit their site, today, and go to their death penalty material, references and links, it is almost all anti-death penalty. Their referenced essays are typical anti-death penalty material that are, easily, contradicted.

This is not uncommon in academia.

The ASC has an official position against the death penalty.

Bias can be overcome and studies/reviews can be accurate and reliable despite bias. It is always a benefit to the reader to know the bias of the funding agency and author(s) of any study/review.


1) Northwestern University School of Law's Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/files/DeterrenceStudy2009.pdf

2) As noted in the Survey, the study authors have not replied to all criticisms of their econometric studies finding for deterrence, just some. That often reflects that the authors found no reason for a defense because the criticism was unworthy of rebuttal (my suspicion with Fagan) or they have not yet published a response (my suspicion with Berk). 

The fact that 61% of the criminologists find some credibility with deterrence, as detected by the empirical studies is important.

Some of the 24 studies and their defenses
Article on Death Penalty Deterrence, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation
http://www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPDeterrence.htm


3) Most quoted polls wrongly poll for murder, not capital murders. The death penalty is only an option in limited capital, death eligible murders. EXAMPLES: (1)82% in the US favored executing Saddam Hussein. In Great Britain: 69%, France: 58%, Germany: 53%, Spain: 51%, Italy: 46%. (Le Monde (France) , 12/06); (2)81% support Timothy McVeigh’s execution – “the consensus of all major groups, including men, women, whites, nonwhites, “liberals” and “conservatives.” 16% oppose (Gallup 5/2/01); (3) 85% of liberal Connecticut supported serial/rapist murderer Michael Ross’ “voluntary” execution (Quinnipiac 1/12/05); (4) 79% support death penalty for terrorists (4/26/2007 New York State poll); (5) 78% of Nebraskans support death penalty for “heinous crimes.” 16% opposed.(MPB Public Affairs Poll, 2/14/08).

Related Issue

OF COURSE THE DEATH PENALTY DETERS
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/03/of-course-death-penalty-deters.html

======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victims' families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
====== 
======
 
Research, with sources, fact checking, vetting & critical thinking, as required of anyone within a public policy debate and which rebut all anti-death penalty claims.
 
Most will realize that the media has been using only anti-death penalty claims and , then, failed to fact check, vet, not use critical thinking, with that research, while avoiding all pro-death penalty research and experts, for decades. How do I know most will realize this? Because they wouldn't have seen any of this, prior:
 
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
(7 pro-death penalty experts listed)

Saturday, June 27, 2009

DEATH PENALTY COSTS: NORTH CAROLINA (1993): Let's Be Honest

Duke (North Carolina) Death Penalty Cost Study (1993): Let's Be Honest
Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom

Contrary to consistent misinformation, the study actually finds that LWOP is more expensive that the death penalty.

A perfect example of how bad things are in academia. 

This cost review has been quoted extensively, in academia, media and in anti-death penalty literature. Every time I have seen it cited, it has been, blatantly, misleading and in error. Not once have I found any correction from the authors. 

Anti-death penalty folks claim that the death penalty costs $2.1 million dollars more than a life sentence in North Carolina.


This sticks as one of the more widely used cost deceptions by the anti-death penalty crowd.


True life cases are more expensive than death penalty cases, as per the Duke Study. (1)


As per the Duke study, the difference in cost between a "life" sentence and a death sentence is from $163,459  -  $216,461. (Table 9.1, page 77)


However, in the study, a "life" sentence is only 20 years. You need to add at least 20 years, or $332, 000/case, to get a true life sentence (my analysis). The Duke study "present valued" incarceration costs at $16, 600/year. (Tables 8.1, page 71 & 9.1, page 73)


The authors also concede leaving out geriatric care, recently found to be $60,000-$90,000/yr/prisoner (various studies). Add $225,000 per case, present valued at $15, 000/year/case for 15 years (my analysis). Geriatric care begins at age 50-55 for prisoners.


The authors should have calculated the cost savings of plea bargains to a life sentence in 20% of the death eligible cases, which accrues as a cost savings for the death penalty. Rough estimate of $40,000 cost saving per plea bargain, an average of $8000/case or 20% of $40,000, although I think the number is too low.


What the study really tells us is that an actual life sentence costs much more than a death sentence.


The study finds that it costs $2.16 million per execution, if you roll the cost of every death penalty cases into only one execution. Specifically, if you have 10 death penalty cases at an "extra cost" of $216, 461/per case, over the cost of a "life" sentence, and you execute 1 of those 10 cases, then the study says that every execution costs $2.16 million more than a single life case.


It's absurd and misleading, of course.


One could be just as misleading and state that it costs $3.48 million per completed true life sentence (death of inmate), over the cost of a death sentence case, if you roll the cost of every true life case into only one lifer's death. Specifically, if you have 10 true life cases at an extra cost of $348,539/per case, over the cost of a death sentence, and 1 of those 10 lifers had died, then every completed true life case costs $3.48 million more than a single death sentenced case. (2)


Just as absurd and misleading, but that is just how that $2.16 million figure was calculated.


NOTE: This highly deceptive presentation of the death penalty costing $2.1 million dollars more than a life sentence has been used extensively and, very, publicly by anti-death penalty activists, for many years. I have found no evidence that the authors of the study ever tried to correct this obvious perversion of their study, although I would find it very hard to believe that they were unaware of it.


Incredibly, New Mexico's irresponsible and/or dishonest Legislative Finance Committee used this Duke study as the only one to show that the death penalty was more expensive than life without parole.


======================================


MANY ADDITIONAL STATE COST REVIEWS


DEATH PENALTY COST: SAVING MONEY

http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/02/death-penalty-cost-saving-money.html

FN

(1) "The Costs of Processing Murder Cases in North Carolina" http://fds.duke.edu/db?attachment-34--1667-view-301


(2) The $348, 539, reflects the cost a true life sentence over the death penalty, based upon costs and credits for true life incarceration (add $332,000 for life), geriatric care (add $225, 000 for life ), & plea bargain savings ($8000 death penalty credit) combined with the studies <$216, 461>. or $565, 000 - $216, 461 = $348,000 more for a true life sentence. My analysis.

 
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victims' families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
====== 
======
 
Research, with sources, fact checking, vetting & critical thinking, as required of anyone within a public policy debate and which rebut all anti-death penalty claims.
 
Most will realize that the media has been using only anti-death penalty claims and , then, failed to fact check, vet, not use critical thinking, with that research, while avoiding all pro-death penalty research and experts, for decades. How do I know most will realize this? Because they wouldn't have seen any of this, prior:
 
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
(7 pro-death penalty experts listed)

Friday, June 26, 2009

Studies Author Mum: Phillip Cook, Prof., U of North Carolina (Chapel Hill)

To: Prof. Phillip Cook, Professor, U of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

I hope you find this of interest.

From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   

Cost Savings: The Death Penalty
Dudley Sharp, contact info below

Reasonable and responsible protocols, currently in use, will produce a death penalty which costs no more, or will cost less, than Life Without Parole (LWOP).

States could better implement justice, as given by jurors, and save taxpayers money, currently wasted by irresponsible state systems.


1) Obvious solution: Improve the system

Virginia executes in 5-7 years. 65% of those sentenced to death have been executed. Only 15% of their death penalty cases are overturned. The national averages are 11 years, 14% and 36%, respectively.

With the high costs of long term imprisonment, a true life sentence will be more expensive than such a death penalty protocol.



2) Current cost study problems

a) Geriatric care: Most, if not all, cost studies exclude geriatric care, recently found to be $60,000-$90,000/inmate/yr., a significant omission from life sentence costs. Prisoners are often found to be geriatric at relatively young ages, 50-55, because of lifestyle.

b) Plea Bargain to life: ONLY the presence of the death penalty allows for a plea bargain to a maximum life sentence. Such plea cost benefit, estimated at $300,000 to $1 million/case, accrues as a cost benefit/credit to the death penalty. I am aware of no study which includes this. They all must, for a relevant cost analysis.

c) The cost of death row: There need not be any additional cost for death row. Missouri and Kansas don't have one.

NOTE: Depending upon jurisdiction, the inclusion of only 2a and 2b will result in a minimal cost differential between the two sanctions or an actual net cost benefit to the death penalty.

Adding (1) would, very likely, mean that all death penalty jurisdictions would see a cost savings with the death penalty as compared to a true life sentence.


3) The Disinformation problem: The pure deception in some cost "studies" is overt.

a) Some studies compare the cost of a death penalty case, including pre trial,
trial, appeals and incarceration, to only the cost of incarceration for 40 years, excluding all trial costs and appeals, and geriatric care for a life sentence. The much cited, highly misleading Texas "study" does this.
b) It has been claimed that it costs $3.2 million/execution in Florida. That "study" decided to add the cost of the entire death penalty system in Florida ($57 million), which included all of the death penalty cases and dividing that number by only the number of executions (18). It is the same as stating that the cost of LWOP is $15 million/case, based upon all costs of 2000 LWOP cases being placed into the 40 lifers to have died (given an average cost of $300, 000/LWOP case, so far, for those 2000 cases.). The much cited and misused Duke University death penalty cost analysis for North Carolina does the same thing.
c) Many of the "studies", such as Maryland's (2008), suffer from similar or worse problems.


4) Deterrence "value": FCC economist Dr. Paul Zimmerman finds that executions result in a huge cost benefit to society. "Specifically, it is estimated that each state execution deters somewhere between 3 and 25 murders per year (14 being the average). Assuming that the value of human life is approximately $5 million {i.e. the average of the range estimates provided by Viscussi (1993)}, our estimates imply that society avoids losing approximately $70 million per year on average at the current rate of execution all else equal." The study used state level data from 1978 to 1997 for all 50 states (excluding Washington D.C.). (1)

That is a cost benefit of $70 million per execution. 15 additional recent studies, inclusive of their defenses, support the deterrent effect.

No cost study has included such calculations.

Although many will find it inappropriate to put a dollar value on life, evidently this is not uncommon for economists, insurers, etc.

The death penalty provides greater protections for innocents than life sentences. (2).

What value do you put on the lives saved? Certainly not less than $5 million.


5) Justice: The main reason sentences are given is because jurors find that it is the most just punishment available. No state, concerned with justice, will base a decision on cost, alone. If they did, all cases would be plea bargained and every crime would have a probation option.

======================================

MANY ADDITIONAL STATE COST REVIEWS

DEATH PENALTY COST: SAVING MONEY
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/02/death-penalty-cost-saving-money.html

=======================================

1) "State Executions, Deterrence and the Incidence of Murder", Paul R. Zimmerman (zimmy@att.net), March 3. 2003, Social Science Research Network, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID354680_code021216500.pdf?abstractid=354680

2) "The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents"
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/01/30/the-death-penalty-provides-more-protection-for-innocents---new-mexico.aspx


copyright 2003-2013 Dudley Sharp
Permission for distribution of this document, in whole or in part, is approved with proper attribution.
 
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victims' families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
====== 
======
 
Research, with sources, fact checking, vetting & critical thinking, as required of anyone within a public policy debate and which rebut all anti-death penalty claims.
 
Most will realize that the media has been using only anti-death penalty claims and , then, failed to fact check, vet, not use critical thinking, with that research, while avoiding all pro-death penalty research and experts, for decades. How do I know most will realize this? Because they wouldn't have seen any of this, prior:
 
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
(7 pro-death penalty experts listed)

Thursday, May 07, 2009

DEATH PENALTY COSTS: COLORADO

Cost, Deception & the Death Penalty: The Colorado Experience
 
From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   

Death penalty opponents fashioned this argument:

End the death penalty, they said, and we can use the $380,000/year (1), the alleged net cost excess of the death penalty, to fund cold case investigations, for over 1400 Colorado unsolved murders.

From the beginning, this was, only, another anti death penalty effort/deception. Plea bargains to a life sentence, only possible because of the presence of the death penalty, likely, save more money (1), thus, ending the death penalty in Colorado may end up costing Coloradans even more.

By the end of the Colorado Legislative session, even for the most naive, all doubt was removed.

Some Senators had re written bill 1274, taken out the death penalty repeal and introduced constant funding for cold case investigations. This revived bill came "up with as much money for cold-case investigations as the bill originally would have" by establishing "a $2.50 surcharge on all traffic tickets and criminal convictions in the state." (2)

Anti death penalty legislators said no. They re instated the death penalty repeal, in conference committee, even though they already had the cold case funds.

The last day of the session, the reconstituted anti death penalty bill failed, just as death penalty opponents knew that it could, thus gutting the additional cold case funding, also part of bill 1274.

This was never about cold case funds. Had it been, death penalty opponents would have secured the funding, in conference committee, then voted for that funding, alone and jubilantly.

This was, only, about repealing the death penalty, whose adherents knowingly sacrificed cold case funding, which, certainly, would have passed, absent the death penalty repeal re introduction.

How cynical did anti death penalty legislators get?

Death penalty opponent and Senate President Peter Groff stated "We've put some nice garnish (cold case funding) around it, but really what this is about is whether government should kill or not kill." (3)

"nice garnish." That is all cold case funding meant to the anti death penalty crowd.

Nationwide strategy

Every few years, death penalty opponents create a new crisis, because their previous one failed. Thus, the cost issue and, in Colorado, its coupling with cold case funding.

This year, there were, at least, 10 states, wherein death penalty opponents were using cost as their main repeal issue.

New Mexico will, likely, be the only state to repeal this year (2009) and started out, strong, with the cost mantra. Cost soon died, as an issue, because it was, blatantly, false.

The NM repeal succeeded only because more anti death penalty democrats were elected.

The ". . . Senate vote to repeal the death penalty in New Mexico was a direct result of November's election of several new lawmakers." The repeal bill's sponsor, Rep. Gail Chase said she was able to get the bill through because the 2008 election added three more senators to the Democratic majority. District Attorney Lem Martinez, who had spoken against the repeal bill, said "the Senate vote was the result of Obama's coattails." ("Senate backs death-penalty repeal", Steve Terrell, The (Santa Fe) New Mexican, 3/13/09). (4)

So goes death penalty opponents machinery of deception, until the next session.

======================================

MANY ADDITIONAL STATE COST REVIEWS

DEATH PENALTY COST: SAVING MONEY
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/02/death-penalty-cost-saving-money.html

=========

600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victims' families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
====== 
======
 
Research, with sources, fact checking, vetting & critical thinking, as required of anyone within a public policy debate and which rebut all anti-death penalty claims.
 
Most will realize that the media has been using only anti-death penalty claims and , then, failed to fact check, vet, not use critical thinking, with that research, while avoiding all pro-death penalty research and experts, for decades. How do I know most will realize this? Because they wouldn't have seen any of this, prior:
 
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
(7 pro-death penalty experts listed)



(1) A few months later, the cost savings of ending the death penalty rose to $1 million/year, the newest alleged net cost excess. A complete cost review, which was not done, may have found little to no cost savings.

See "Cost Savings: The Death Penalty"
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/05/07/cost-savings-the-death-penalty.aspx

" . . . the actual amount of money that would have been saved if there were no death penalty was a subject of considerable dispute." ("Death penalty may live on", The Daily Sentinel, May 05, 2009)

(2) "Death penalty may live on", The Daily Sentinel, May 05, 2009


(3) "Senators vote to keep executions", The Durango Herald, May 07, 2009


(4) See "Why did Gov. Richardson repeal the death penalty? His legacy"
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/03/31/why-did-gov-richardson-repeal-the-death-penalty-his-legacy.aspx

"Rebuttal to Governor Richardson - Repeal of the Death Penalty in New Mexico"
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/03/19/rebuttal-to-governor-richardson--repeal-of-the-death-penalty-in-new-mexico.aspx

and,

on the New Jersey death penalty repeal, see my four responses to New Jersey Assembly Speaker Roberts' article, after his article. Starting with:

DEAD WRONG: NJ Death Penalty Study Commission