2007: USA: Scientific Studies: Death Penalty Deters crime and Saves Lives

(005320.38-:E-003569.93:N-HO:R-SU:C-30:V)   

[This is an incredibly important article with incredible implications for South Africa. This study shows that up to 18 lives are saved with each EXECUTION! Now, given that in S.Africa we have a plethora of serial killers and repeat killers, I wonder what the effect here would be? Could it be that in a country like this that one execution might save 25 or even 30 lives???

The scientific debate among economic statisticians is complete, but one gets these political forces who cannot accept the truth and then they come with their BS to muddy the waters and to try, by using smoke and mirrors and character assassination to now hide the truth once more. The Political Left will now try to return us to our previous state of ignorance.

What I do like, and which I think is unique is the observation that EXECUTING MURDERERS SAVES LIVES!! That puts a whole different spin on things. By executing one killer you’re not only saving the lives of people he might yet kill but you’re detering others from killing. Let’s take it one step further… one is actually even saving the lives of potential future killers who now do not kill out of fear of their own execution!! Think about that!

As I see it, its a win-win situation.

Another fascinating concept is that by making the executions happen SOONER – one saves even more lives! I had a similar theme in Government by Deception.

I must publish the crime plan I espoused in my book, Government by Deception back in 2001. In it I spoke about this – about the need for short, sharp sentences. I wrote at length about the “short-and-sharp” punishment of crime to really smack criminals hard. Its like punishing a child. Don’t smack your child 6 months later for what he did. Smack him there and then. It strengthens the association in his mind between Cause-and-Effect. One must do the same with criminals.

Over the years I’ve added other modifications to the original ideas in Government by Deception. Here are some things I’ve advocated:-
1. That ALL criminal sentences be made much shorter and much much harsher. Make punishment short and SHARP! It must bite. (This has the effect of requiring less prisons – plus the deterrent effect is much greater).

2. Most criminal sentences should be hard labour. We have a prison population of almost 200,000 criminals. 80% of them should be out there in large workgangs working in the townships and cities – building infrastructure and fixing up the country. (And let me add, they should be shot dead if they try to escape).

3. Criminals should not just be executed for murder, but for child murder, under age rape, attempted murder and various crimes which are excessively violent and cruel or have the intent to kill. (e.g. torture of the victims).

4. Going back to (1) above, if you punish a criminal you must punish him really hard – short and sharp. The sentence should be almost 1/10th of the length of sentences meted out now. For example, instead of a 10 year sentence, give the guy 1 year – one year of hard labour HELL! For example, the criminals must work: 10 hours a day 6 days a week – with only a one day break. They will be too tired to ever sit around to concoct new ideas.

5. Life sentences should automatically be commuted to Death – and the criminal executed.

6. Once severely punished: Consider the criminal REHABILITATED! This is the only portion of the idea that is lenient. Once you’ve socked it to the criminal you let him return to society. You do NOT allow anyone to discriminate against him because of his criminal record. You do NOT allow employers to ask for criminal records. He must be treated as a normal person in society. You give him proper chance to get a real job and to live an honest life. (If he returns to his former criminal behaviour see the next point!)

7. Be easy on first time offenders, but become much tougher on repeat criminals – exponentially so. First time be easy, next time be harsh. Third time round you start smacking him really hard. Excessive repeat offenders should be EXECUTED!! (There is no place in a civilised society for habitual criminals).

8. I also think that people in leadership and Government positions should be punished even harder than normal people. Corruption and the theft of public money above a certain amount (e.g. over R1 million) should carry with it the DEATH PENALTY! (At this rate, thousands of ANC Civil servants would have to be executed!!!) Govt should not be a place for people to steal public funds.

9. If a criminal escapes from the country, he should be put on trial in abstentia. Then he must be put on a special forces hitlist – and if they ever find the bastard, anywhere in the world, even 50 years later, they must put a bullet through his head.

10. Gang leaders and leaders of Organised Crime Syndicates should be executed if found guilty of such charges. There is no place for gangsterism in a civilised society.

That’s how I would recommend we deal with criminals. I am convinced that we’d cut crime in S.Africa to 1% of its current levels.

In this regard, I’ve forgotten to mention Norman Reeves and the excellent CombatSecurity company. Click here for: www.combatgroup.co.za I support them and they’ve been very supportive of AfricanCrisis. Now Norman Reeves has been persecuted because of photos like these which I put up in 2006:-
[Photo] Combat Group’s Tea Party for a Durban Thief…

The ANC was gunning for him a lot last year. They tried to drag him down and break his company through a series of lawsuits and false trumped up charges. I always encourage AfricanCrisis Readers to support CombatSecurity and to spread word of them. We must support people like Norman Reeves who are willing to take hits for us and to defend us.

[13 Pics] Crime Loving Govt Arrest S.Africa’s Top Crime Fighter!

The Human Rights fools, who like to PROTECT CRIMINALS AND WHO ENDORSE THE MURDER OF INNOCENT CIVILIANS… went after Norman Reeves. Our ANC scum Govt who loves, protects and nurtures the criminal rubbish of this country also gunned for Norman. They used fake trumped up charges against him.

When Norman Reeves was under attack, Jeff Rense interviewed the both of us. Norman then stated that crime in S.Africa could be wiped out in 6 months. I agree. I think it is very possible myself. I don’t think it is just big talk. Norman is a man of action and Combat Security can do this type of stuff. If the Police, Army and Security Companies climbed in… crime could be smashed… BUT FIRST THE CRIME LOVING LAWS MUST BE CHANGED!

With my mom being ill and the general chaos in my life, I forgot to mention that eTV, after exposing and assisting in the persecution of Norman Reeves, then actually turned around and did something decent. They went and did a story a few weeks back about how CombatSecurity moved into a small town where the Police were getting 200 crime calls a week. In one week, CombatSecurity shut the criminals up. The Police station received NO CALLS that week! There were photos of Norman and his black security guards who are trained in his military style in this little town. They drove the criminal scum out (who no doubt moved to find softer targets).

I still wanted to do a story about Combat Security and what they did in that small town. Sadly I overwrote the film footage which I had taped. I must ask Norman if he has some photos for me. I am sure the Police, the Army and many other Security Companies could do the same… IF THE GOVERNMENT CHANGED THE LAWS.

Solving the crime problem in this country is not difficult. It never has been. We never had crime like this under white rule. Its a matter of: DO YOU REALLY WANT TO? The only people in this country who want to keep crime flourishing are our leaders – like President Mbeki and Nqakula – they love criminals and want them to breed.

People in this country have been crying for the death penalty for years. But its our scum ANC Govt which is in love with the criminals and which feeds and breeds this low-life human trash.

I’ve said… The ANC loves crime, wants crime and wants to make it worse. You could say that South Africa is governed by Criminals and for the benfit of Criminals. The rest of us are just there so the criminal rubbish can feed off us!

I would like to thank the anonymous reader, “Fox” who discovered this item and who brought it to my attention. I highlighted crucial paragraphs in the article below. Jan]

Anti-death penalty forces have gained momentum in the past few years, with a moratorium in Illinois, court disputes over lethal injection in more than a half-dozen states and progress toward outright abolishment in New Jersey.

The steady drumbeat of DNA exonerations – pointing out flaws in the justice system – has weighed against capital punishment. The moral opposition is loud, too, echoed in Europe and the rest of the industrialized world, where all but a few countries banned executions years ago.

What gets little notice, however, is a series of academic studies over the last half-dozen years that claim to settle a once hotly debated argument – whether the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder. The analyses say yes. They count between three and 18 lives that would be saved by the execution of each convicted killer.

The reports have horrified death penalty opponents and several scientists, who vigorously question the data and its implications.

So far, the studies have had little impact on public policy. New Jersey’s commission on the death penalty this year dismissed the body of knowledge on deterrence as “inconclusive.”

But the ferocious argument in academic circles could eventually spread to a wider audience, as it has in the past.

“Science does really draw a conclusion. It did. There is no question about it,” said Naci Mocan, an economics professor at the University of Colorado at Denver. “The conclusion is there is a deterrent effect.”

A 2003 study he co-authored, and a 2006 study that re-examined the data, found that each execution results in five fewer homicides, and commuting a death sentence means five more homicides. “The results are robust, they don’t really go away,” he said. “I oppose the death penalty. But my results show that the death penalty (deters) – what am I going to do, hide them?”

Statistical studies like his are among a dozen papers since 2001 that capital punishment has deterrent effects. They all explore the same basic theory – if the cost of something (be it the purchase of an apple or the act of killing someone) becomes too high, people will change their behavior (forego apples or shy from murder).

To explore the question, they look at executions and homicides, by year and by state or county, trying to tease out the impact of the death penalty on homicides by accounting for other factors, such as unemployment data and per capita income, the probabilities of arrest and conviction, and more.

Among the conclusions:

– Each execution deters an average of 18 murders, according to a 2003 nationwide study by professors at Emory University. (Other studies have estimated the deterred murders per execution at three, five and 14).

– The Illinois moratorium on executions in 2000 led to 150 additional homicides over four years following, according to a 2006 study by professors at the University of Houston.

– Speeding up executions would strengthen the deterrent effect. For every 2.75 years cut from time spent on death row, one murder would be prevented, according to a 2004 study by an Emory University professor.

In 2005, there were 16,692 cases of murder and nonnegligent manslaughter nationally. There were 60 executions.

The studies’ conclusions drew a philosophical response from a well-known liberal law professor, University of Chicago’s Cass Sunstein. A critic of the death penalty, in 2005 he co-authored a paper titled “Is capital punishment morally required?”

“If it’s the case that executing murderers prevents the execution of innocents by murderers, then the moral evaluation is not simple,” he told The Associated Press. “Abolitionists or others, like me, who are skeptical about the death penalty haven’t given adequate consideration to the possibility that innocent life is saved by the death penalty.”

Sunstein said that moral questions aside, the data needs more study.

Critics of the findings have been vociferous.

Some claim that the pro-deterrent studies made profound mistakes in their methodology, so their results are untrustworthy. Another critic argues that the studies wrongly count all homicides, rather than just those homicides where a conviction could bring the death penalty. And several argue that there are simply too few executions each year in the United States to make a judgment.

“We just don’t have enough data to say anything,” said Justin Wolfers, an economist at the Wharton School of Business who last year co-authored a sweeping critique of several studies, and said they were “flimsy” and appeared in “second-tier journals.”

“This isn’t left vs. right. This is a nerdy statistician saying it’s too hard to tell,” Wolfers said. “Within the advocacy community and legal scholars who are not as statistically adept, they will tell you it’s still an open question. Among the small number of economists at leading universities whose bread and butter is statistical analysis, the argument is finished.”

Several authors of the pro-deterrent reports said they welcome criticism in the interests of science, but said their work is being attacked by opponents of capital punishment for their findings, not their flaws.

“Instead of people sitting down and saying ‘let’s see what the data shows,’ it’s people sitting down and saying ‘let’s show this is wrong,’” said Paul Rubin, an economist and co-author of an Emory University study. “Some scientists are out seeking the truth, and some of them have a position they would like to defend.”

The latest arguments replay a 1970s debate that had an impact far beyond academic circles.

Then, economist Isaac Ehrlich had also concluded that executions deterred future crimes. His 1975 report was the subject of mainstream news articles and public debate, and was cited in papers before the U.S. Supreme Court arguing for a reversal of the court’s 1972 suspension of executions. (The court, in 1976, reinstated the death penalty.)

Ultimately, a panel was set up by the National Academy of Sciences which decided that Ehrlich’s conclusions were flawed. But the new pro-deterrent studies haven’t gotten that kind of scrutiny.

At least not yet. The academic debate, and the larger national argument about the death penalty itself – with questions about racial and economic disparities in its implementation – shows no signs of fading away.

Steven Shavell, a professor of law and economics at Harvard Law School and co-editor-in-chief of the American Law and Economics Review, said in an e-mail exchange that his journal intends to publish several articles on the statistical studies on deterrence in an upcoming issue.

2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

URL: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DEATH...
Source: https://archive.africancrisis.info/?p=13821