American Exceptionalism in Crime and Punishment (AECP) & Capital Punishment Overview

Overview: American Exceptionalism in Crime and Punishment (AECP)

• AECP defines how the United States diverged from other Western nations in both crime levels and punitive responses in the mid-to-late 20th century.
• Key focus areas often highlighted:
  • high incarceration rates; and
  • persistence of the death penalty.
• AECP spans the broader landscape of punishment beyond prison terms, including:
  • probation, parole, economic sanctions, and collateral consequences of conviction.
• Analytical focus should pair U.S. crime rates with the severity of U.S. penalties.
• Causation considerations include:
  • gun ownership rates;
  • income inequality;
  • conditions in America’s most disadvantaged neighborhoods;
  • the possibility of two-way (bidirectional) causation between crime rates and punitive severity.
• Core takeaway: AECP involves a broad punitive regime, not just incarceration or execution, and its study requires linking crime data to punishment policies and social context.

Key Concepts and Definitions

• American Exceptionalism in Crime and Punishment (AECP): the observed divergence of the U.S. from other Western nations in crime rates and punitive responses.
• Punitive severity: the harshness or stringency of punishment beyond mere incarceration, including death penalty, collateral consequences, and sanctions.
• Collateral consequences of conviction: secondary penalties affecting individuals post-conviction (e.g., voting rights, employment barriers, housing restrictions).
• Two-way causation in crime and punishment: the idea that crime rates may influence punitive policies and that punitive policies may influence crime rates, in a feedback loop.
• Foundational variables to consider for causal analysis: gun ownership, income inequality, neighborhood conditions, and other structural factors.

Global Capital Punishment Landscape (context from slides)

• The death penalty remains in use in a subset of countries; many nations have abolished or abolished in practice.
• Percent-based observation: approximately 30\% of the world’s countries retain the death penalty (Amnesty International).
• Abolition status categories used in the slides (source references include Amnesty International; Economist; DPIC):
  • Abolished for ordinary crimes;
  • Abolished in practice (abolished in law but prosecutions persist or vice versa);
  • Retained for exceptional crimes (e.g., military crimes, terrorism);
  • In use for ordinary crimes.
• Sectoral implication: Western Europe largely abolitionist; much of South and Central America has moved toward abolition; the U.S. remains among the notable retainers of the death penalty, alongside several countries in the Middle East and North Africa.
• Notable takeaway: cross-national variation underscores that public opinion, legal frameworks, and political cultures shape capital punishment regimes.

Executing Countries in 2016 (Amnesty International snapshot)

• The slide provides a map with the general locations of executing jurisdictions and the minimum counts where applicable.
• Key country entries (examples from the slide):
  • China: 567+ executions (minimum figure; data often reported as state secret).
  • Iran: hundreds of executions annually; majority for drug-related offenses; numerous death sentences imposed.
  • Saudi Arabia: scores of executions.
  • Iraq: significant increase in executions.
  • Pakistan: data not explicitly enumerated in the slide (shown among executing countries).
  • Egypt: 44+ executions.
  • USA: 20 executions (note: US data is presented alongside state and federal levels).
  • Somalia: 154+ executions.
  • Bangladesh: 14 executions.
  • Malaysia: 10 executions.
  • Afghanistan: 6 executions.
  • Belarus: 4+ executions.
  • Indonesia: 4 executions.
• Other jurisdictions listed without explicit counts include Singapore, Japan, Vietnam, North Korea, Taiwan, etc., with the overall map signifying that execution activity occurred in some of these places or remains unconfirmed.
• Persistent executioners: the slide highlights 11 "persistent executioners" during 2012–2016, indicating a core set of countries with ongoing practice.
• Important methodological caveats:
  • Counts are minimum figures where indicated; the total number of executions in some places (e.g., China) is not fully disclosed publicly.
  • Judicial executions may have occurred in some countries where the slide notes limited verification (e.g., Libya, Syria, Yemen).
• Visual takeaway: there is wide geographic variation, with the US positioned among a minority of nations maintaining capital punishment, contrasted with broad abolition in Europe and much of the Americas.

The Global Context: 2015–2016 Trends in Capital Punishment

• 2015 data (Amnesty International, excluding China):
  • More than 1{,}600 executions carried out in 25 countries.
  • Approximately 90\% of those executions occurred in Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia.
• Global abolition trend:
  • Roughly 30\% of the world’s countries retain the death penalty.
  • Most European and many South and Central American countries have abolished the death penalty in full or in practice.
• Regions where death penalty persists: United States, parts of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), and certain Asian states.
• Common methods used around the world (examples include):
  • Beheading;
  • Electrocution;
  • Hanging;
  • Lethal injection;
  • Shooting.
• Implication for policy: global trends show a strong movement toward abolition, but the U.S. remains an exception in several respects.

Death Penalty in the United States: Visual Data and Interpretation

• Executions in the United States (DPIC-style data visualization):
  • The slide uses a state-by-state map and accompanying dashboards to show historical and current execution counts.
  • Federal executions are shown separately from state executions; federal executions list is noted (e.g., 16 federal executions mentioned).
  • The data visualization includes breakdowns by state, race of those executed, race of victims, whether the executed person was a foreign national, and other categories (DPIC data schema).
• Totals and highlights (as presented on the slide):
  • The visualization lists an all-category total of 1{,}586 executions in the dataset (denoting all categories combined).
  • A separate line indicates 16 Federal Executions.
• Caveat: the chart is a snapshot of DPIC’s execution fact sheet and Tableau visualization; figures may vary with time and reporting.
• Practical implication: in the U.S., execution practices are highly decentralized across states, with a federal component and a long historical arc of variation in state laws and moratoriums.

Public Opinion and the Death Penalty in the United States

• Public opinion trajectory: the slide summarizes Capital Punishment and the Role of Public Opinion.
• Key points:
  • In 1966, support for the death penalty was as low as 42\%.
  • In 1994, support peaked at 80\%.
  • Today, support is around 60\%-65\%.
• Comparative note: the United States’ abolition in some Western countries occurred when a majority of citizens supported the death penalty (e.g., Canada, France, Germany, United Kingdom), indicating that public opinion alone does not deterministically decide policy—legal, political, and cultural factors also play crucial roles.
• Implication for policy and politics: shifts in public opinion correlate with policy changes in some contexts but do not guarantee rapid reform, given the constitutional, political, and federal nature of U.S. governance.

Connections to Foundational Principles and Real-World Relevance

• Foundational principles in criminal justice (policy context): deterrence, incapacitation, retribution, and rehabilitation; the AECP framework engages with how these principles translate into a broad punishment regime.
• Real-world relevance:
  • The U.S. confronts trade-offs between protecting public safety and limiting punitive harms (including collateral consequences).
  • Global context informs domestic debates about legitimacy, human rights, and equity in punishment.
  • The role of public opinion, judicial processes, and political institutions shapes how punitive policies evolve over time.
• Ethical and philosophical implications:
  • Debates over the legitimacy of the death penalty (morality, risk of wrongful conviction, proportionality).
  • Equity considerations in punishment severity and enforcement across demographic groups.
  • The broader impact of collateral consequences on families, communities, and social mobility.

Key References and Data Sources (as cited in slides)

• Amnesty International: global death penalty status and execution data; 2016 snapshot and 2015 context.
• Economist and DPIC (Death Penalty Information Center): supplementary data on death penalty status and U.S. executions.
• ecpm.org: global death penalty overview.
• The slide includes sample execution charts and fact sheets for further detail, e.g., Execution Fact Sheet: https://dpic-cdn.org/production/documents/pdf/FactSheet.pdf

Quick Reference: Notable Figures and Points (LaTeX-formatted)

• Global abolition share: 30\% of countries retain the death penalty.
• 2015 global executions (excluding China): 1{,}600+ with roughly 90\% in ext{Iran}, ext{Pakistan}, ext{Saudi Arabia}.
• European/Americas abolition trend: Most of Europe and many of South/Central America have abolished.
• 2016 country counts (illustrative examples):
  • China: 567+
  • Iran:
  • Saudi Arabia: ext{scores}
  • Iraq:
  • Pakistan:
  • USA: 20
  • Somalia: 154+
  • Bangladesh: 14
  • Malaysia: 10
  • Afghanistan: 6
  • Belarus: 4+
  • Indonesia: 4
• Persistent executioners: 11 countries with ongoing executions during 2012–2016.
• Public opinion benchmarks: 42\%
  ightarrow 80\%
  ightarrow 60-65\% over time.