Meyer 1

Christopher Meyer
Professor Dursema
English 1010
27 November 2015

Capital Punishment: A justifiable deterrent?

The date was January 24, 1989, and one of the most notorious serial killers of our
time is facing his fate. Theodore Robert Bundy was put to death around 7:00 a.m. in the
Florida State Prison by means of the electric chair. Ted Bundy, the name by which most
people are familiar when discussing this serial killer, had admitted to killing 36 women.
His execution elated crowds of people who were waiting outside of the prison. But his
death did not extinguish the publics interest with Ted Bundy. Instead, his life has
sparked a myriad of books written, movies, and documentaries made, all trying to
examine the horrific crimes that he committed (Bio). In some cases such as this one, the
death penalty may seem to be a justifiable punishment, but is it a viable deterrent to
committing murder?

While some studies have argued that implementing the death

penalty has deterred murder, there appear to be flawed statistics to this theory that are
unfounded. If these studies hold no conclusive evidence, or at least evidence that is
questionable, then why should they be used as a contributing factor to support the
continued practice of capital punishment in this country?
Until 1975, claims made by supporters of the death penalty that it was a deterrent
were largely untested. That was until Professor Isaac Ehrlich from the University of

Meyer 2
Buffalo published an article claiming that during the 1950s and 1960s, the death penalty
had been responsible for the deterrence of eight murders for every execution that was
carried out. This was inspired by economic research done by Professor Gary Becker
from the University of Chicago. Professor Ehrlichs theory on this economic model was
that criminals would avoid illegal behavior based on the possibility of facing the death
penalty (Fagan). But Ehrlichs conclusions were soon criticized and disputed. His
conclusions were rejected by some formidable opponents including; The Yale Law
Journal and a panel of experts that was assembled by the National Academy of Sciences
(Fagan). Ehrlichs findings seemed to be losing standing and credibility. However, an
ongoing debate on the subject had begun.
Since 1975, other researchers have continued to use statistical findings to support
the idea of capital punishments ability to deter criminals. While their conclusions seem
to hold some persuasion, there still appear to be holes in such theories. One such
argument is well stated in a 2012 study done by authors Charles F. Manski from
Northwestern University, and John V. Pepper from the University of Virginia. They imply
that Data alone cannot reveal what the homicide rate in a state without (with) a death
penalty would have been had the state (not) adopted a death penalty statute (Raphel,
Whibey). There appear to be so many different variations in the evidence used to support
the idea of deterrence that the results are arguably inconclusive. Some of these studies
appear to add assumptions such as trying to explain why the murder rate changes over a
period of time, and whether or not executions affected those murder rates due to
experiences that may have occurred in different counties or states. They also try to
discount other possible factors that may actually influence crime rates such as economic

Meyer 3
conditions, demographic changes, and the overall influence of the criminal justice system
in and of itself (Liptak).
Some other factors that should be considered as possible deterrents to criminals
committing murder include the threat of lifetime incarceration and the deplorable
conditions that exist in prison life. Also, executions are not carried out with any type of
frequency or consistency in some cases. One such example is a study done by the
Committee on Deterrence and the Death Penalty, which was formed by the NRC in 2012,
where the committee concludes that research done in the previous thirty years had not
properly advanced the position of capital punishments influence on deterrence,
regardless of the qualifications of those who were involved with those studies. A general
concern as to why research has fallen short on bringing definitive answers on the effects
of capital punishment is that one cannot isolate the impact of capital punishment if there
is not a stable pattern to which defendants are or are not executed. Some serious crimes
may be given the option of either capital or non capital punishment, which may have an
effect on behaviors and possibly discount the conclusions of the effect that capital
punishment may have on deterrence (Raphel & Wihbey).
Another presentable debate to the death penaltys claim of deterrence is that there
is essentially no way of determining the knowledge that someone considering committing
murder might even have on the subject of which types of murders may qualify them for
the death penalty. There has been no clear or definitive testing done among murderers to
determine deterrence, or to show their awareness of executions that have taken place in
their own state (Fagan). It would seem a critical piece of the puzzle to be able to add

Meyer 4
credibility to the argument of deterrence if there was a way to determine that criminals
properly understood what the consequences of their actions would be.
Recent academic studies on capital punishment are bringing some positive
momentum to those who support the death penalty. A study co-authored in 2003 by Naci
Mocan, who is an economics professor at the University of Colorado at Denver,
concluded that there is a deterrent effect to capital punishment. The study was revisited
in 2006 and found that five fewer homicides were committed for every execution.
Mocan states that The results are robust, they dont 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 (Tanner). Mocan is not the only opponent of the death penalty that is being
persuaded by new evidence that is being presented. Cass R. Sunstein is a law professor
from the University of Chicago that has weighed in on this debate as well. Sunstein who
has been an opponent of the death penalty, declared in a Stanford Law Review article
along with Adrian Vermeule, a law professor at Harvard, that the recent evidence of a
deterrent effect from capital punishment seems impressive, especially in light of its
apparent power and unanimity (Liptak). The two professors were quoting a conclusion
from the Annual Review of Law and Social Science, by Robert Weisburg who is a law
professor at Stanford. These reviews and opinions question the credibility of the
argument that capital punishment may be a viable deterrent to murder.
On January 17, 1977, Gary Gilmore became the first person in the United States
to be executed after the lift on the moratorium of death sentences. The death penalty had
been reinstated on July 2, 1976. In 2005, a book written by Dennis R. Stilson, The
Gilmore Gun, Echo of Murder, portrays the crimes and execution of Gary Gilmore. In

Meyer 5
Chapter twelve of this book, as part of a theory given by Richard Salazar, PhD., Salazar
argues that There are those who claim application of the death penalty is ineffective, that
it does not deter crime.

No rational human being can appropriately make such a

definitive statement because there is no scientific evidence to support such a statement.

True, there are articles in the journals of sociology, psychology, and criminology which
claim the death penalty has no deterrent effect.

Some journals even claim capital

punishment is associated with higher rates of murder. However interesting these articles
may be, we should keep in mind these articles do not reflect science. These articles are
usually based on surveys, and surveys are not science (Stilson).
In conclusion, while recent studies seem to hold more credibility than some
earlier studies have on the deterrence of capital punishment, the conclusions of these
findings still appear to be flawed and unpersuasive. There does not appear to be enough
in-depth research involved in these studies to be able to make a conclusive argument that
it is an actual deterrent. There are too many factors left out of the equation in these
studies. This brings about serious questions about their reliability. It is unreasonable to
suppose these unfounded claims have any influence on claiming that capital punishment
is a viable deterrent to murder.

Meyer 6
Works Cited
Fagan, Jeffrey, Capital Punishment: Deterrent Effects & Capital Costs.
Law.columbia.edu. Columbia Law School. 2015. Web. 18 November 2015.
Liptak, Adam. Does Death Penalty Save Lives? A New Debate. New York Times.
New York Times. 18 Nov. 2007. 18 Nov. 2015.
Raphel, Alexandra, and Whibey John. The research on capital punishment: Recent
scholarship and unresolved questions. Journalistsresource.org. Harvard
Kennedy School. 5 Jan. 2015. 18 Nov. 2015.
Biography.com Editors. Ted Bundy Biography biography.com. A&E Television
Networks. n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2015.
Stilson, Dennis. The Gilmore Gun, Echo of Murder. United States. G4G LLC. 2005,
Revised 2009. Print.

Meyer 7