Monday Map: Death is Not a Deterrent

Published April 27, 2009 @ 05:22PM PT

The map above shows the number of executions in each state since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. There have been 1,155 executions nationwide in those three-plus decades. In the same time, there have been 590,000 murders. That means if all things were equal (geography, race and socioeconomic level of the defendant, etc), each murder would carry a .02% chance of execution. Only two murders in 1,000 are punished by execution. If you believe the death penalty is a deterrent, don't forward this post to a potential murderer - they might figure out that the chances of lethal injection are slim, and then who knows what they'll do.

Of course, all things aren't equal and some populations have a much greater chance of being executed. But that's another story.

The Denver Post ran this map recently following a vote in the Colorado House to repeal the state's death penalty and divert the millions of dollars spent each year on capital cases to the investigation of unsolved murders. Colorado is an extreme example of the ineffectiveness of spending on the death penalty, the state has only executed one person since 1976, but has 1,000 unsolved murders and not enough resources to investigate them.

The Colorado bill is now before the state Senate, and its fate is unknown. Change.org community member William Newmiller started an action to support the repeal the death penalty in Colorado, it needs just 56 more senders to reach its goal. Send an email today.

Spread the Word

More You Can Do

Get action and news alerts about Criminal Justice »
Browse top Criminal Justice organizations to support »
Find out more about Criminal Justice and what you can do to help »

Comments (2)

How many people who have been executed under the death penalty have come back to life to commit murder again?
The answer is zero and therefore it does "deter" all those executed from committing additional crimes.
Keep the death penalty and expand it into states like Massachusetts.

Posted by Richard Forrest on 04/28/2009 @ 08:30AM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by Richard
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply
Richard, an intellectually honest analysis of the deterrent effect of capital punishment would have to compare murder rates in places with capital punishment against those without capital punishment. Such studies have been done and show that, indeed, capital punishment does not deter.

The 2007 rates for Texas and Massachusetts are 5.9 and 2.9 respectively, an indication that the people of Massachusetts, which currently does not use capital punishment, are only half as likely to be murdered as residents of Texas, which on its own executes more people than the rest of the states combined.

Regarding recidivism (which you seem to be talking about, which is different from deterrence), do you know of a study concerning recidivism for murderers who have received non-lethal punishment? Without hard data, it's hard to evaluate the significance of the claim you're making. However, considering the significant difference in rates between Texas and Massachusetts, whatever positive effect capital punishment may have on recidivism is obviously minimal.

Further, any benefit from capital punishment needs to be balanced against other factors, such as its mistaken application against the innocent and its extraordinary cost.

To buy into capital punishment based only upon the bumper-sticker claim that "he won't do that again" is simply lazy thinking.

Posted by william newmiller on 04/29/2009 @ 05:46AM PT
- Report close
  You must be signed in to report content.
- Reply
- Like
For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

reply to thread started by by william
Check Spelling
- Email me when there are new posts to this thread
- Comment Policy
Cancel Reply

Add a Comment

For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

First Name:

Last Name:

Email:

Create Password:

Comment

Check Spelling

Email me when there are new posts to this thread
Comment Policy

Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.

Author

Matt has worked and volunteered in various capacities in criminal justice reform for several years. When he's not blogging, he works as the Online Communications Manager at the Innocence Project. Views expressed here are Matt's, and don't represent the positions of the Innocence Project.