According to Sorensen et al. (1999), one of the commonly used approaches in defining the relationship between the death penalty and deterrence is comparing the homicide rate and actual execution performance or the death penalty's legal status. The brutalization hypothesis is supported when the rates of homicides are high, and they are found within the jurisdiction of capital punishment. If the rates of homicides are lower and found within the jurisdictions where the death penalty is in use, then the deterrence hypothesis is supported. Another possible death penalty outcome is a situation where the death penalty is found to have no impact on the rates of homicide. Sorensen et al. (1999)also argues that the rate of homicides among the retentionists states are higher than the abolitionist states
Sorensen et al. (1999) conducted a study to investigate the deterrence hypothesis in the modern era. The study utilized data between 1984 and 1997, and the data were collected from official sites. The year of data collection was selected based on the availability of homicide cases during that period. The author used the timeframe because numerous executions were conducted during the period.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
According to the study findings, the rate of murder in the Texas state between 1984 and 1991 indicated no discernible trend in association with the execution rate. After the execution crisis in the mid-1980s, the murder decreased slightly, but the homicide rate started to increase from 1990 through 1991. The decreases in murder rate were attributed to the deterrent effect, while the increased homicide rate was attributed to an earlier lull in execution, thus supporting the deterrence hypothesis. The deterrence hypothesis was further supported by the increasing executions and decreasing murder rates during the 1990s. Based on the authors' study findings, most active execution states did not support the deterrence hypothesis. The study also showed that the selected executions did not influence the rate of felony murder and the rate of general murder. Furthermore, the brutalization hypothesis was not supported by any execution. The execution did not affect the number of murders, either in the case of the brutalization hypothesis. Based on Sorensen's study's result analysis, there was no relation between the number of executions and Texas's murder rates for the study period; 14 years. However, other factors related to murder rates; include the murder conviction rates, population age, the population in metropolitan areas, and the season. The rate of felony murder has no association with the number of executions. The research study also indicated that the same factors affecting murder rates in general, were equally related to felony murder rates predictors. Factors such as population age group, conviction rate, and population in metropolitan areas are positively associated with the felony murder rate and negatively related in the low season. The unemployment rate was also found to be the main positive influencing factor when it comes to felony murder rate. Although the research has been praised, many criticisms have been raised because the authors did not produce any evidence on deterrent effects. Some missing data cases were also reported in the calculation of felony murder rates, raising concerns over the study's validity and realibity. There were also cases of missing data regarding circumstances surrounding the homicide. Regardless of the highlighted study limitations, Sorensen's article was generally useful in relating the number of executions with the murder rate in general and the rate of felony murder.
Reference
Sorensen, J., Wrinkle, R., Brewer, V., & Marquart, J. (1999). Capital punishment and deterrence: Examining the effect of executions on murder in Texas. Crime & Delinquency , 45 (4), 481-493.
