Support for capital punishment rests on retribution, not deterrence evidence

Evidence

In the final analysis, empirical findings do not change people’s minds regarding the death penalty. Many advocates say that they would still support the death penalty even if it was demonstrated conclusively to have no deterrent effect (Vidmar & Ellsworth, 1974). As shown in the poll cited earlier (Newport, 2011), they seek retribution and vengeance. Deterrence is low on their list. Conversely, abolitionists say they would oppose capital punishment even if it was demonstrated conclusively to deter homicides. — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 1966

Categorization

• SEED: The fact that neither side is moved by empirical evidence makes capital punishment a pure moral-values issue, an angle for an essay on why policy arguments fail when positions are retributive rather than instrumental.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm…, 1966
• XREF: connects to: Capital punishment is reserved for murder and barred for non-homicide crimes. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2008; The same exoneration data supports both reform and defense of capital punishment — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2050; Skepticism about deterrence does not reduce support for executions. (+2 more)