Looking beyond the death penalty.

Alternatives to capital punishment

The original article reviewed public-opinion research from the United States during the late twentieth century. Its central observation was that a simple question about supporting or opposing execution can produce a different result when people are asked to compare it with specific sentences.

Why the question matters

“Capital” in the phrase “capital punishment” refers historically to the head and, more broadly, to punishment involving the taking of life. Public discussions of the policy often connect moral responsibility, public safety, punishment, the possibility of error and the needs of victims’ families.

Older surveys commonly found substantial support for the death penalty when it was presented as a choice between execution and no execution. The source essay argues that support often fell when respondents were offered defined alternatives, including lengthy imprisonment without parole and programmes requiring compensation for victims’ families.

Virginia polling, 1989–1999

A Virginia survey asked respondents first whether they supported the death penalty for people convicted of murder. It then presented an alternative involving life imprisonment without parole for a defined period and a restitution programme connected with prison work. The reported results indicated that a majority preferred the alternative when it was made explicit.

A series of state quality-of-life polls during the 1990s showed high but declining support for execution, alongside majority support for the proposed alternative in the later results.

National polling reported in 1993

The source essay summarized a national survey in which support for capital punishment varied according to the alternative presented. Support was reported as higher when the comparison was simply “no death penalty,” and lower when respondents considered long-term imprisonment, permanent restrictions on parole or restitution.

• 77% support when the alternative was described only as no death penalty.
• 56% support when the alternative was imprisonment without parole for 25 years.
• 49% support when the alternative was permanent imprisonment without parole.
• 44% support when the 25-year imprisonment option included restitution.
• 41% support when permanent imprisonment included restitution.

These figures illustrate why survey design matters: a response to a broad principle is not necessarily the same as a response to a detailed sentencing choice.

Ohio survey, 1997

A survey of Ohio adults reported that 66% favoured the death penalty for people convicted of murder, while smaller groups supported it only in certain circumstances or opposed it. Respondents also differed over the possibility that an innocent person might be executed.

When offered an alternative involving life imprisonment without parole and work connected with payments to a victim’s family, 59% reportedly supported the alternative and 31% preferred execution. The source reported a margin of error of less than four percentage points for these data.

Continuing the archive

This essay continues in Part 2. For the broader topic, see the death penalty menu. Readers may also consult the site’s explanation of margin of error when interpreting survey results.

References noted in the original essay

1. J. E. Dison, research on changing attitudes toward capital punishment, presented to the American Society of Criminology in 1984.
2. Death Penalty Information Center, a 1993 report discussing public preferences for sentencing alternatives.
3. A report on Virginia polling and public support for alternatives to execution.
4. Ohio State University survey research concerning attitudes toward capital punishment in 1997.