"How to explain this? I believe it is because capital punishment teaches society that murder is acceptable, if you can justify it. Therefore certain, possibly unhinged, people will take their own situation and justify murder - just as the state teaches them."

I'd say that analysis is a little simplistic. Japan has the
death penalty, yet IIRC, their murder rate is far lower then
virtually all US States.

If you take a trip through the US, comparing North and South,
say Maine and Alabama, its like day and night, like two different
countries. The gun culture, racial tensions, lots of differences,
which would play a role between the two.

In Saddam's case, enough tens of thousands of people were affected
by his violence, that they should be considered too. Yup, some
of them badly wanted revenge and will sleep better now, fair enough.

Hopefully a few other maniac leaders, like in North Korea, Zimbabwe
and other places will take a bit of notice, that if they abuse
their populations for long enough, chances are that they might
swing off a rope

Carsten “The murder rate of the death penalty states increased from 2002, while the rate in non-death penalty states decreased." (www.deathpenaltyinfo.org)."

….I believe it is because capital punishment teaches society that murder is acceptable, if you can justify it. Therefore certain, possibly unhinged, people will take their own situation and justify murder - just as the state teaches them. Homicide rates could equally be influenced by demographic factors, such as the mix of ethnic origins. “

I repeat as I stated previously

“Homicide rates could equally be influenced by demographic factors, such as the mix of ethnic origins
A state in the North East USA, which may not have a death Penalty, will have its origins and ethnic balance steeped in English Puritanism. Texas, on the other hand, with the death penalty, has a far different ethnic mix.”

What someone believes is their own subjective assessment, based on their personal background, education and a fist full of other variables.

What is not proven is that absence of a death penalty does produce lower homicide rates.

I would suggest, simplistically put, the availability and public attitude toward guns is a far more significant factor than the absence or presence of a death penalty.

However, my suggestion is like yours, an unproven view.

To satisfy the manic cravings of one small minded poster (immediately previous to carsten’s post) I would point out that what I said above in “statistic speak” means “a null hypothesis does not prove a negative but proves nothing”. Having sorted out the statistical analysis and pacified CJMorgan I will leave him to foam at the mouth over rodent poo, a topic which seems to fill his posts (and defines their merit).

Rainier “the inability to prove the deterrence theory” that is fair observation.
However, few things in life are determined by the logic of proof (if they were we would all have sufficient house and life insurance and would not bother to try and win tatts)

TurnRightThenLeft “taunting” I agree,

Likewise the “no camera” rule failed. Executions should not be turned into public side shows.

Col: "“a null hypothesis does not prove a negative but proves nothing”"

Sure Col - but you still have to be able to reject it if you want to claim significance for your alternative hypothesis.

I'm sure you're a brilliant accountant, but you're no statistical genius, old son. I'd stick with the loopholes and small print if I were you.

“Homicide rates could equally be influenced by demographic factors, such as the mix of ethnic origins
A state in the North East USA, which may not have a death Penalty, will have its origins and ethnic balance steeped in English Puritanism. Texas, on the other hand, with the death penalty, has a far different ethnic mix.”
Posted by Col Rouge, Thursday, 4 January 2007 10:59:12 PM

I agree that my argument is from a statistically insignificant number, and that other factors are also involved. Although I do not think the divide is as simple as non-execution NE puritan on the one hand, and Texas on the other. There are 13 CP states - it seems odd that they are also the top murder states. My questioning the effectiveness of capital punishment may well be a gut reaction. I do not think it is definitively provable - but is also what I believe.

Also, I understand countries like Japan have the death penalty and a far lower murder rate. But I think the rate would be low, regardless of the penalty - that cultural influences outweigh the penalty.

Carsten I was not promoting the idea that one state would have a lower homicide rate simply because of the historic values of its founding fathers, quite the opposite.

I made the point to illustrate that no one single factor, such as presence or absence of a death penalty, can be reasonably tested to be seen as a significant factor.

Your observation to Japan and where you presume “that cultural influences outweigh the penalty.” Would confirm, again, what I said.

So too rainiers quotation “There does seem to be little empirical data to suggest that the death penalty is a greater deterrent”

can be adopted to suggest that abolition of the death penalty is no deterrent either.

As in most things from Abortion to Zoos, subjective values and not objective reasoning determines what people choose to believe.

When it comes to the death penalty, very few objective arguments ever come to bear

Only when innocent people are executed do we realise how stupid it is.