Perverse consequences of stiffer penalties for pedophiles
In the latest issue of the Southern Economic Journal, Robert Ekelund, John Jackson, Rand Ressler and Robert Tollison write about the death penalty in their article “Marginal Deterrence and Multiple Murders.â€Â The effect of the death penalty on murder rates, the subject of their article, is probably not what most students would guess economists might think about all day. What has already been shown consistently in previous economic studies of crime and punishment is that murder rates are lower where:
(1) it is more likely murderers are arrested
(2) it is more likely murderers are sentenced
(3) it is more likely murderers are executed
Each factor alone reduces the murder rate. For example, holding sentencing rates, execution rates, and other unmentioned factors constant, the higher the chance of being arrested, the lower the murder rate.
In basic economics classes we discuss why it is the marginal cost of actions – the additional cost of one more unit of the activity – that affects behavior. For the same reason, teachers wisely use a set of progressively tougher penalties against repeat offenses in their classrooms. If, as the article points out, the marginal cost of the first murder is as high as it can possibly be (death), then the marginal cost of any subsequent murders can only be zero. Stated differently, if you are likely to be executed if arrested from killing one person, there is no extra penalty for the next murder. If the punishment for a single murder is very extreme, the result is likely to be more multiple and serial homicides.
Consider applying the same logic when thinking about the movement to increase the punishment for first-time child molesters.
With one of us being the father of three children, we surely do not want the courts to hand down light sentences for child sex offenders. A 60-day sentence given to a man who had repeatedly raped a young girl in Vermont is obviously irresponsibly lenient. The people supporting Jessica’s Law, including Bill O’ Reilly of Fox News fame, would agree. Jessica’s Law, named for Jessica Lundsford of Florida, requires convicted child-sex offenders to serve a sentence ranging from a minimum of 25 years to a maximum of life for a first offense. A version of Jessica’s law was recently passed here in Louisiana.
In keeping with the theme of our posts, there are often overlooked consequences of a change. The reduction in the number of first-time child sex offenders is “what is seen.†But “what is unseen†is frightening and alarming. Consider the reprehensible dilemma facing a low-life having just committed a sexual offense against a child. If arrested and convicted of child rape in Florida or Louisiana (Jessica’s Law states), the offender will face a minimum of 25 years in prison. Might this offender consider the fact that murdering the victim (the prime witness) will likely reduce the probability of being convicted of the sexual assault?
If the offender ends up being convicted of murder he may face execution, but execution usually only occurs after 20 years or so of waiting on death row, till all appeals are exhausted. At the time of the crime, the penalty for murder does not seem that much worse than a 25-year minimum penalty for child molestation. In the language of economists, the marginal cost of escalating the crime from sexual assault to murder is quite low. Unfortunately, Jessica Lundsford’s rapist found the reduction in the chance of being convicted worth killing Jessica even before Florida passed its tough minimum sentences for child rapists.
We are not suggesting that Jessica’s Laws should be repealed. However, we are pointing out that while these laws reduce first-time child rapes, they also increase the rate at which children are murdered by their molesters. A proper discussion or analysis of Jessica’s Law should take both “the seen†and “the unseen†consequences into account.
Morris Coats and Chad Turner
February 22nd, 2006 at 9:40 am
I agree with what was said. Like it is said, people respond to incentives. How do we fix that problem? My guess would have to be just pray because no matter what, people are going to get raped and killed.
March 5th, 2006 at 1:23 pm
I’ve recently received an email that said ASAP stood for (Always Say A Prayer). While I feel praying is very important, I believe that rapist and people who murder others respond things that directly affect their wellbeing. Unfortunately I too, agree that our system sometimes sets it up so that one can get away with more through murder than if the victim survived. I believe that awareness is essential and the databases that have been and are being set up can help. Privacy laws have given this idea some problems. Lastly, although I do not condone homosexuality, I think that society too often assumes that just because someone is homosexual that they are potential child molesters. We need more people to be willing to discuss these issues openly so that the public will be more aware. Awareness is key.
March 9th, 2006 at 9:53 pm
It’s a touchy issue for me. Going to Catholic school all my life, I was always told that killing people was wrong- in reference to capital punishment. And that at the very last second of that person’s life, they may see the light. I never really bought that, but I was torn. Being away from Catholic school for a few years has allowed me to gather my thoughts, without pressure. Basically, I feel if someone is sick enough to kill or molest someone else, especially children, they should recieve the maximum penalty. Of course one has to look at all the facts of cases, murder cases anyway. But to me, keeping people on death row or letting them off with mild penalties is just a drain on society. If you leave them on death row, we spend all that money keeping them alive in prison, since the legal system isn’t exactly swift in most cases; and if we let them off, they just do it again. So in a nutshell, I think people should become aware of how things ACTUALLY work in this world, and then maybe a better way of handling things could be reached.
December 7th, 2006 at 10:31 am
Sex offenders should get more years for molesting children. Tweny-five years is not enough. The offenders have harmed a poor and innocent chilkdren. These children will have to live with memories for the rest. In return, the offenders should be in prison for the rest of his life. The Jessica law should be re-evaluated.