"The bottom line is this: it doesn’t pay in electoral terms to oppose the execution of terrorists. The ALP should have realised that before McClelland’s speech."

Whilst this is true, McCelland has received positive feedback because he stood up on a matter of ALP (and Liberal!) policy and of principle regardless of popularity. Even if people don't necessarily agree with it, it still generates respect.

So its come to this.
What are the effects postive or negative on the "economy" of public executions?
Economists or the bottom-line boys rule OK.

It is a ridiculous assertion that it is OK to execute people in Indonesia but not in Australia. To support such a position implies that the value of human life is somehow less in other countries than in Australia.

Economists often misjudge the complexity of human behaviour. For those who have a religious conviction that they will be martyred and hence improve their lot in life, execution will act as a perverse incentive to commit murder.

As a policy test, a cost/benefit analysis on capital punishment without assessing alternatives is an ill informed debate. As it is, the authors present no information to inform whether execution actually deters crime and certainly quantitative analysis would not inform the social costs to society of a "hang 'em high policy". Capital punishment is not and should never be reduced to an economic debate.

Also, there are plenty of "practising Christians" in America (and probably elsewhere) that support executions. Their head of state is just one such individual.

No, it isn't unreasonable Voevud. It's not about supporting the death penalty for some people and not for others.

It's the fact that like it or not, other countries run things differently. We can privately disagree, but that's different to actively opposing.

I wouldn't mind seeing our government make noises against the death penalty overseas, but then again, ultimately I tend to think it won't actually do much persuading and has the risk to harm international relations in some cases, so I can understand the approach.

It isn't about saying it's okay overseas but not here. It's about realising that when it's overseas, it isn't our call.

"Opposition to the death penalty is an elitist concern.

According to the 2004 Australian Election Study 51 per cent of Australians support the reintroduction of the death penalty for murder."

Subtracting 51 percent from 100, leaves 49 per cent who don't support the reintroduction of the death penalty for murder.

How many of those are actively opposed to the death penalty is an unknown (it depends on what you call active opposition), nonetheless the fact that there's been a decline suggests that the "elite" who are opposed to the death penalty has grown since 1993 (see Davidson and Fry, "Capital punishment still has majority support in Australia", OLO, 16 October 2007).

Will opposition to the death penalty remain an "elitist" concern once a minority of Australians support it? That position looks very close already, with only 51% supporting it.

It seems someone lost track of the distinction between fact and opinion in the writing of this article.

What a thin argument and what a waste of ARC funding.

The authors obviously don't have any empirical evidence to support the claim that capital punishment acts as a deterrrent or we can be sure they would have presented it.

Opposition to the death penalty is not an elitist opinion; it's an informed one. The authors' own figures (for 1996 and 2004) support the fact that public opinion has moved as levels of understanding and awareness have increased.

The death penalty is always wrong and any civilized nation has a duty to take that position to the world, especially if that nation is attempting to impose its democracratic ideals onto others, as we are in Iraq for example.

Capital punishment only prolongs the philosophy that killing people is an acceptable activity. We will never remove the threat of terrorism while we stoop to the same barbaric practices ourselves.