More on Deterrence

As Michael points out, quite appropriately, the studies regarding deterrence on which Sunstein and Vermeule rely are contested, and -- in any event -- reasonable people can and will disagree about the conclusions to be drawn from the data.  And, the "brutalization" thesis mentioned by Joanna Shepherd -- whom Michael quotes -- has always struck me as having considerable force.  Still, Shepherd agrees that “executions deter murders in six states," suggesting that -- at least in those states -- those of us who oppose capital punishment need other arguments. 

Now, just to be clear, I did not suggest, and do not believe, that the Sunstein & Vermeule article or the studies it invokes provide convincing deterrence-based reasons for supporting the death-penalty.  (In fact, in my post, I specifically disagreed with the conclusions that these scholars draw from what they treated as the data).  That said, it strikes me that the ongoing debate about the connection between the death penalty and deterrence -- the existence of which is confirmed by Shepherd's work -- continues to provide good reasons for the Bishops to avoid building their anti-death-penalty case on the "no deterrence" claim.  In my view, the content of their witness should be different.

I tried to flesh out this view, in more detail, in this article.

Rick