NCJ Number
45882
Journal
American Journal of Economics and Sociology Volume: 36 Issue: 1 Dated: (1977) Pages: 105-109
Date Published
1977
Length
5 pages
Annotation
A CRITIQUE OF THE MCKEE AND SESNOWITZ (1976) ECONOMIC ARGUMENT AGAINST CAPITAL PUNISHMENT, WHICH HOLDS THAT THE GAINS MADE BY BENEFICIARIES ARE FINITE WHILE THE LOSSES TO THE LOSERS ARE INFINITE, IS PRESENTED.
Abstract
WHAT THIS ARGUMENT SUGGESTS IS THAT THERE IS NO SUM OF ANY MAGNITUDE WHICH IS SUFFICIENT TO COMPENSATE AN EXECUTED INDIVIDUAL FOR HIS OWN LIFE. MCKEE AND SESNOWITZ ASSUME THAT AN INDIVIDUAL WILL NEVER SUBSTITUTE THE DOMINANT GOOD; E.G., HIS OWN LIFE, FOR ANY QUANTITY OF ANOTHER GOODS NO MATTER HOW LARGE. THIS ASSUMPTION IS FALSE IN THE ORDINARY RANGE OF ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR AND APPARENTLY DOES NOT APPLY IN LIFE/DEATH EXCHANGES EITHER, FOR INDIVIDUALS ARE KNOWN TO HAVE TRADED THEIR LIVES FOR A HIGHER VALUED GOOD SUCH AS HONOR, SAFETY OF THE COUNTRY, OR PRESERVATION OF THEIR FAMILIES. MCKEE AND SESNOWITZ GO ON TO ARGUE THAT THE VALUE OF THE MURDERER'S LIFE IS GREATER THAN THAT OF HIS POTENTAL VICTIM BECAUSE INDIVIDUALS (I.E., POTENTIAL VICTIMS) EVALUATE SMALL CHANGES IN PROBABILITY OF DEATH AT RATHER LOW PRICES WHEN THE VICTIM(S) CANNOT BE IDENTIFIED. HOWEVER, THIS PROPOSED ASYMMETRY IN VALUATION IS NOT JUSTIFIED AS IT APPEARS TO ASSUME THAT THE PRESENCE OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT CAN BE EQUATED WITH CERTAIN DEATH WHEN IN FACT ARGUMENTS CONCERNING PROBABILITY OF DEATH AND IDENTITY APPLY EQUALLY TO THE OFFENDER AND THE VICTIM. ONCE THIS ASYMMETRY IS ELIMINATED. ONE IS AGAIN DISCUSSING A MATTER OF FINITE COSTS AND BENEFITS; TO DISCUSS COSTS AND BENEFITS TO THE POTENTIAL VICTIM AND THE POTENTIAL MURDERER IN TERMS OF AN EXCHANGE PARADIGM, HOWEVER, SEEMS AT BEST SOMEWHAT STRAINED. FURTHER, CONJECTURES ABOUT WHAT POTENTIAL VICTIMS AND MURDERERS DEMAND AS COMPENSATION FOR LIFE SEEM LARGELY IRRELEVANT TO SOCIAL DECISIONS ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. TO A LARGE EXTENT, THE CONTROVERSY OVER THE DEATH PENALTY CAN BE SEEN AS A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE DESIRE TO TREAT PRISONERS IN A HUMANE AND CIVILIZED MANNER AND THE DESIRE TO MAKE THE PUNISHMENT FIT THE CRIME. INADEQUATE DETERRENCE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE A CRITICAL ISSUE IN THE SUBSTITUTION OF MILDER FOR MORE SEVERE FORMS OF PUNISHMENT. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THESE MILDER SENTENCES CAN IN FACT MEET THE NEEDS OF JUSTICE. IN UPHOLDING THE DEATH PENALTY, SUPREME COURT JUSTICE POTTER WROTE, 'IN PART CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS AN EXPRESSION OF SOCIETY'S MORAL OUTRAGE AT PARTICULARLY OFFENSIVE CONDUCT.... IT IS ESSENTIAL IN AN ORDERED SOCIETY THAT ASKS ITS CITIZENS TO RELY ON LEGAL PROCESS RATHER THAN SELF-HELP TO VINDICATE WRONGS.' (JAP)