Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/22/national/22DEAT.html



The dozen states that have chosen not to enact the death penalty since the Supreme Court ruled in 1976 that it was constitutionally permissible have not had higher homicide rates than states with the death penalty, government statistics and a new survey by The New York Times show.

Indeed, 10 of the 12 states without capital punishment have homicide rates below the national average, Federal Bureau of Investigation data shows, while half the states with the death penalty have homicide rates above the national average. In a state-by- state analysis, The Times found that during the last 20 years, the homicide rate in states with the death penalty has been 48 percent to 101 percent higher than in states without the death penalty.

The study by The Times also found that homicide rates had risen and fallen along roughly symmetrical paths in the states with and without the death penalty, suggesting to many experts that the threat of the death penalty rarely deters criminals

In addition to Michigan, and its Midwestern neighbors Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota and Wisconsin, the states without the death penalty are Alaska, Hawaii, West Virginia, Rhode Island, Vermont, Maine and Massachusetts, where an effort to reinstate it was defeated last year.

Population rank:

Alaska: 48th
North Dakota: 47th
Rhode Island: 43rd
Vermont: 49th
Maine: 40th
Michigan: 8th
Iowa: 30th
Minnesota: 21st
Hawaii: 42nd
Massachusetts: 13th
West Virginia: 37th

Outside of Michigan and Massachusetts, I think these numbers have a direct correlation to murder rates. Much more so than whether or not they've got the death penalty.

But Mass, Michigan, RI, Hawaii, WV have population DENSITY.

Nice try, but FAIL

dbackjon wrote:But Mass, Michigan, RI, Hawaii, WV have population DENSITY.

Nice try, but FAIL

RI: 2
Mass: 3
Hawaii: 13
Michigan: 16
West Virginia: 29
Vermont: 30
Minnesota: 31
Iowa: 35
Maine: 38
North DAkota: 47
Alaska: 50

Bolded states are BELOW the national average in density.
What do all the high density states have in common? Beaches.



Unless you're gay, this has a tendancy to distract murdurous thoughts.

I'm struggling with the data correlation...

Chizzang wrote:I'm struggling with the data correlation...

I'm shootin' from the hip here, hippie. Help me out....

AZGrizFan wrote:

Chizzang wrote:I'm struggling with the data correlation...

I'm shootin' from the hip here, hippie. Help me out....

Are you laughing at me..?
I'm horribly offended

I'm just sayin' I don't see the validity of the connection.. in reference to Death penalty & Murder rates
It seems like two true statements or observations, independent of the data, and the fact that the data matches does not necessarily show a valid correlation...

it's interesting information but it's not relative to the point it strives to make...




I thought you were making irrelevant observations to show the disconnect..? (No..?)

I didnt read one word in this thread but it seems as if the death penalty is working.

Several thoughts.

dback, exactly how does West virginia have population density? Also, in WV, you can carry on your hip.

Maryalnd has the death penalty, but refuses to use it, on of the reasons the beltway sniper was extradicted to Virginia. Where is Maryland on this list, I gotta think it's pretty high up in both pop and density.

I am against the Death Penalty, but think this article is "B" as in "BS" as in "S".

#1 Louisiana - Highest Murder rate, but rate has dropped from 17.5 to 11.9 from 1996 to 2008.

The only state with the death penality that has a higher murder rate since 1996 is Deleware, going from 4.3 5 to 6.5. States without the death penalty where murder rates have gone up include New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont, Iowa, and Maine.

To generalize, murder rates around the country have gone down. I don't see any correlation between states having the death penalty or not having the death penalty.

Murder Rate Link

Chizzang wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:



I'm shootin' from the hip here, hippie. Help me out....

Are you laughing at me..?
I'm horribly offended

I'm just sayin' I don't see the validity of the connection.. in reference to Death penalty & Murder rates
It seems like two true statements or observations, independent of the data, and the fact that the data matches does not necessarily show a valid correlation...

it's interesting information but it's not relative to the point it strives to make...




I thought you were making irrelevant observations to show the disconnect..? (No..?)

No, no....you are exactly correct. My data is JUST as relevant as these two data points. And much more "conversation-friendly".

Suddenly, Dbackjon has "gone dark".

It is called "work"

"Violence begets violence."
- Gil Dobie, 2002

dbackjon wrote:It is called "work"

riiiiiiiiiiight.

Was the death penalty designed to deter crime or to snuff out the criminals so they never murdered again?

blueballs wrote:Was the death penalty designed to deter crime or to snuff out the criminals so they never murdered again?

Both.

Specific and general deterrance theories.

Pretty much fool-proof when it comes to specific deterrance. But arguably completely ineffective when it comes to general deterrance.

AZGrizFan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:But Mass, Michigan, RI, Hawaii, WV have population DENSITY.

Nice try, but FAIL

RI: 2
Mass: 3
Hawaii: 13
Michigan: 16
West Virginia: 29
Vermont: 30
Minnesota: 31
Iowa: 35
Maine: 38
North DAkota: 47
Alaska: 50

Bolded states are BELOW the national average in density.
What do all the high density states have in common? Beaches.



Unless you're gay, this has a tendancy to distract murdurous thoughts.

I'd slay it, does that count?

danefan wrote:

blueballs wrote:Was the death penalty designed to deter crime or to snuff out the criminals so they never murdered again?

Both.

Specific and general deterrance theories.

Pretty much fool-proof when it comes to specific deterrance. But arguably completely ineffective when it comes to general deterrance.

It's kept me from killing morons for YEARS.

AZGrizFan wrote:

danefan wrote:
Both.

Specific and general deterrance theories.

Pretty much fool-proof when it comes to specific deterrance. But arguably completely ineffective when it comes to general deterrance.

It's kept me from killing morons for YEARS.

Don't get murder mixed up with justifiable homicide.

But it really depends on whether you buy into rational choice theory or not. If you don't believe a choice to murder can ever be rational, then its not consistent to believe that the death penalty can be a general deterrent.

I'm a firm believer that sometimes the herd just needs to be culled.

danefan wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
It's kept me from killing morons for YEARS.

Don't get murder mixed up with justifiable homicide.

But it really depends on whether you buy into rational choice theory or not. If you don't believe a choice to murder can ever be rational, then its not consistent to believe that the death penalty can be a general deterrent.

It does not matter whether I believe in rational choice theory. It just matters if I give a shit.