The 1998 Texas Crime Poll involved a statewide telephone survey designed and commissioned by the Criminal Justice Center’s Survey Research Program at Sam Houston State University. In that survey, conducted by Texas A&M University’s Public Policy Research Institute (PPRI) on behalf of Sam Houston State University in July of 1998, a total of 548 Texans were queried about their attitudes toward a wide variety of crime and criminal justice issues. If you are interested in seeing the technical information describing the sample selection process, administration of the survey instrument, and completion rates for interviews, you may either write or call the Survey Research Program at the address or number listed in the front of this report. This information can also be accessed through the World Wide Web at http://www.shsu.edu/cjcenter/College/srpdex.html.
Included in this year’s survey were questions concerning:
• the extent of the public’s confidence in the criminal and juvenile
justice systems and their components;
• how concerned people are about becoming the victim of crimes; and
• attitudes about the transfer of juvenile cases to the adult courts, people’s thoughts about the relationship between crime portrayed through the media and the actual rates of crime, and the use of the death penalty.
Several of the issues addressed this year were also included in the Texas Crime Poll completed in 1978. Throughout this report, Texans’ responses to the questions in this year’s survey will be reported along with a discussion of some of the more substantive findings regarding the differences between the attitudes and experiences reported in 1978. It is important to note, however, that the data collected in this year’s survey sometimes involved different question wording. The 1978 data were also collected through a “mail survey” rather than through telephone interviews. Exact comparisons across the two samples, therefore, cannot always be made.
Table 1.1 provides descriptive information about the respondents
from the 1998 survey. The largest proportion of this year’s respondents
were between 40 and 49 years of age representing 23% of the total sample.
Eighteen- to 29-year-olds and 30- to 39-year-olds each represented 20%
of the total sample. Respondents in the 60 years of age and older
category comprised 19% of the sample while the remaining 18% were aged
50 to 59.
Table 1.1 Characteristics of respondents
|
|
|
|
Age
30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ |
|
|
Ethnicity
Hispanic Black/African-American Other |
|
|
Gender
Female |
|
|
Education
High school graduate Some college College graduate Graduate work |
|
|
Household Income
$15,000-$30,000 $30,000-$60,000 Greater than $60,000 |
|
|
Seventy-four percent of the sample reported they were White, 14%
Hispanic, and 9% Black/African-American. The remaining 3% reported
being “other.” Compared with the 1990 census data, this year’s sample
underrepresented the minority ethnic populations in Texas. Census
data show that 27% of Texans are Hispanic and that 12% are Black/African-American.
Accordingly, any findings concerning differences across ethnic subgroups
reported in this analysis should not be generalized beyond the sample included
in the 1998 Texas Crime Poll.
Fifty-three percent of this year’s sample were male and 47% were
female. These figures differ slightly from 1990 census data for Texas,
which reports 49% of Texans are male and 51% are female. Once again,
differences across gender groups should not be generalized beyond this
year’s sample.
Twenty-nine percent of this year’s sample had completed “some
college” course work. Twenty-eight percent had earned a high school
diploma or equivalent. Those respondents who reported a “less than
high school” level of education represented 11% of the total. College
graduates comprised 22% of total respondents with the remaining 10% reporting
that they completed some level of graduate work.
The largest household income group (39%) represented in this
year’s survey is comprised of annual household incomes from $30,000 to
$60,000. Those households reporting an income greater than $60,000
represented 27% of the total, while households reporting under $15,000
comprised only 12%. The remaining 22% of the sample includes those
households reporting a $15,000 to $30,000 annual household income.
Both the education and income variables cannot be compared to census figures
because of categories used to represent the data; therefore, it is not
possible to exactly compare the sample distributions with the population
marginals for those characteristics.
Throughout this report, statements will sometimes be made about
the differences in attitudes and opinions between different subgroups of
Texans. Whenever such statements are made, the differences being
noted may or may not be identified as “significant.” Differences
identified as being “significant” have a high probability (chi-squared
values with p < or ? .05) that they are not the product of chance, but
are, instead, associated with the subgroup characteristics being analyzed.
In such cases, readers can access the statistical information used to determine
their significance levels by directly contacting the Survey Research Program
and requesting that it be sent by mail. This information is also
available through the World Wide Web at www.shsu.edu/cjcenter/College/srpdex.html.
SECTION 2: CONFIDENCE IN THE CRIMINAL AND JUVENILE JUSTICE
SYSTEMS AND THEIR COMPONENTS
This section of questions in the 1998 Texas Crime Poll was designed
to assess Texans’ confidence in agencies which share responsibility
for dealing with crime and juvenile delinquency. Respondents were
asked how confident they were with a total of ten different criminal/juvenile
justice agencies representing both state and local levels. They were
also asked about their general familiarity with the “criminal justice system”
and the “juvenile justice system.”
Table 2.1 presents a listing of the agencies included in the
survey and shows how much confidence Texans have in each of the individual
components of the criminal and juvenile justice systems. The vast majority
of Texans have “a great deal” or “some” confidence in both their local
police department (83%) and the Texas Department of Public Safety (86%).
As has been the case in previous Texas Crime Polls, the 1998 sample of
Texans were overwhelmingly more confident in law enforcement than any other
component of the system. The local adult court system received the
second highest level of confidence (67%) which is similar to past polls.
Table 2.1 Confidence in the criminal and juvenile justice systems and their components
Question: How much confidence do you have in _____ (components were
described and inserted
in a random order)?
Percent responding
| Component of the system
“A great deal” or
“Little” or “no”
“Don’t know”
“some” confidence confidence or refused Law Enforcement
Courts
Probation and Parole
Corrections
System as a whole
|
Fifty-seven percent of the respondents had “a great deal” or “some”
confidence in adult prisons within the state, but nearly one-half (48%)
expressed “little” or “no” confidence in the adult parole system. Furthermore,
both the local probation and state parole components of the justice system,
at both adult and juvenile levels, received low levels of reported confidence.
It is worth noting, however, that approximately one-fifth of the respondents
“don’t know” or refused to state their level of confidence in local adult
probation (17%), local juvenile probation (20%), and state juvenile parole
(20%). Finally, Texans report lower levels of confidence in the agencies
dealing with juveniles (as opposed to adults) across all components of
the system as well as the system as a whole.
Statistical tests show that White respondents were significantly
more likely to express “a great deal” or “some” confidence in their local
police department, the DPS, the local adult court system, and the adult
prison system than were Hispanics, Black/African-Americans and people from
“other” ethnic groups. Additionally, those with a high school education
or less are more likely to have “little” or “no” confidence in the DPS
than those who have some college education or beyond. Finally, females
were significantly less likely than males to express confidence in the
adult criminal justice system.
Texans’ confidence in the criminal and juvenile justice systems
can be further examined by analysis of whether or not their reported familiarity
with the systems and their individual components is associated with
how much confidence they have in the components. In order to ascertain
the respondent’s familiarity with the system’s components, the following
question was asked, “How familiar are you with… (each of the 12 agencies
being examined was listed in random order by the interviewers)?”
Respondents were prompted to report if they were “intimately familiar”
(know many details about the institution’s operation and organization),
“ broadly familiar” (know some details about the institution’s operation
and organization), “familiar” (know about the institution's operation and
organization in general terms), “somewhat familiar” (know very little about
the institution’s operation and organization beyond location, name, etc.),
or “not familiar” (no knowledge at all) with each component of the two
systems. Table 2.2 shows the association between “familiarity with the
system” and a person’s level of confidence in the systems and their components.
For ease in presentation, the sample was grouped into those who reported
some level of familiarity and those who reported “not familiar.”
Table 2.2 also shows how many people report having some level of familiarity
with each of the components. Respondents reporting “don’t know” or
who refused to answer the familiarity question were excluded from further
analysis.
Table 2.2 Confidence in criminal and juvenile justice system components
by those who are familiar with the individual component
| Familiarity with:
|
|
|
|
| Law Enforcement
Local police department Familiar (89) Not Familiar (11) Department of Public Safety Familiar (83) Not Familiar (16) |
|
|
|
| Courts
Local adult court system Familiar (65) Not Familiar (34) Local juvenile court system Familiar (45) Not Familiar (55) |
|
|
|
| Probation and Parole
Local adult probation Familiar (40) Not Familiar (60) Local juvenile probation Familiar (38) Not Familiar (62) State adult parole Familiar (43) Not Familiar (57) State juvenile parole Familiar (33) Not Familiar (67) |
57
39 |
|
|
| Corrections
State adult prisons Familiar (55) Not Familiar (45) State juvenile prisons Familiar (73) Not Familiar (28) |
|
|
|
| System as a whole
Criminal justice system Familiar (73) Not Familiar (28) Juvenile justice system Familiar (48) Not Familiar (52) |
|
|
|
The figures in Table 2.2 clearly show that citizens who are most
familiar with the system are likely to have the highest levels of confidence
in the systems and their components. Statistical tests show that
in all cases, those respondents who are familiar with the system’s components
were significantly more likely to state that they have “some” or “a great
deal” of confidence in the systems and their components. It is also clear
that people are considerably more familiar with the law enforcement components
than any other parts of the criminal or juvenile justice systems.
For example, 89% of the sample said that they had some level of familiarity
with their local police departments compared with only 33% claiming some
level of familiarity with the juvenile parole system. In general,
people were also less familiar with the juvenile justice system than they
were with the adult system.
Additional statistical tests were conducted on the 1998 sample
to determine if any significant differences in the levels of familiarity
reported by the different demographic groups in Table 1.1 could be found.
Hispanics and Black/African-Americans were significantly less likely to
report familiarity with their local police department, DPS, adult court
system, and the adult prison system than were Whites and “others.”
Males were more likely to report familiarity with their local police department,
the DPS, the local adult and juvenile court systems, the state adult and
juvenile prison systems, the adult parole system, and both the criminal
and juvenile justice systems as a whole.
The figures in Table 2.3 report the association between system
contact and level of confidence. Also reported in Table 2.3
are the percentages of the total sample reporting whether or not they had
any contact with the components. Whether or not the respondents had
contact with the criminal or juvenile justice systems in general was not
asked.
Table 2.3 Confidence in the system and whether or not respondents
had
any direct contact with the component
Percent responding (may not totall 100 due to rounding error)
| Contact with:
(% of total sample) |
|
|
|
| Law Enforcement
Local police department Contact (42) No Contact (58) Department of Public Safety Contact (33) No Contact (68) |
|
|
|
| Courts
Local adult court system Contact (17) No Contact (83) Local juvenile court system Contact (7) No Contact (93) |
|
|
|
| Probation and Parole
Local adult probation Contact (8) No Contact (92) Local juvenile probation Contact (6) No Contact (94) State adult parole Contact (6) No Contact (94) State juvenile parole Contact (2) No Contact 98) |
|
|
|
| Corrections
State adult prisons Contact (10) No Contact (90) State juvenile prisons Contact (3) No Contact (97) |
|
|
|
Table 2.3 clearly shows that the majority of Texans who have had
direct agency contact express “a great deal” or “some” confidence in that
particular component of the system. Comparing the percentages of
people expressing confidence in the components of the system across Table
2.1 and Table 2.3 shows that in several cases, contact with the agency
increases the respondent’s level of confidence in that component.
For example, Table 2.1 shows that only 46% of the total sample reported
having “some” or “a great deal” of confidence in the adult probation system
compared with 77% of those respondents who had direct contact with the
adult probation system during the past year.
Additional statistical tests were conducted on the 1998 sample
to determine if any significant differences in the levels of contact reported
by the different demographic groups in Table 1.1 could be found.
Those respondents who reported being White and having an annual household
income over $30,000 were significantly more likely to report direct contact
with their local police department than were non-Whites and those with
an annual household income under $30,000. Males were also significantly
more likely than females to report direct contact with their local police
department, local criminal court system, and adult probation system.
SECTION 3: FEAR OF CRIME AND LIKELIHOOD
OF CRIMINAL VICTIMIZATION
The next section of the 1998 survey examined citizens’ concerns
about becoming the victim of a crime and was constructed to allow some
comparisons to be made between citizens’ concerns today compared with the
concerns expressed by a sample of Texans included in the 1978 Texas Crime
Poll. Table 3.1 includes comparative figures showing how many people
felt that they would become the victim of crimes during the year following
the survey. Table 3.1 also shows the proportion of respondents in
each year who felt that they would become the victim of any of the crimes
during the next year. This measure represents an overall indicator
of how concerned people were about becoming a crime victim.
Table 3.1 Percent of respondents reporting fear of becoming
the victim
of crimes during the next year: 1978 vs. 1998
Question: Do you feel you may be the victim of any of the following
crimes between now and the next 12 months? What about (crimes were
asked in random order)? (Table reports percent of people responding
“yes” to the questions.)
|
Fear of becoming the victim of: Rape
Fear of becoming the victim of any of the above
|
|
|
The data represented in Table 3.1 clearly show that over the past
twenty years, there has been relatively little change in the overall level
of fear people have about becoming the victim of the particular crimes
included in the surveys. Fifty-nine percent of this year’s sample
expressed fear that they would become the victim of at least one of the
crimes listed in 1998 compared with 57% of the 1978 sample. A close
examination of the figures concerning each of the individual categories
of crime shows that, while the overall level of fear may be the same, today’s
citizens are considerably more afraid of personal violent crimes than were
those included in the 1978 study. In 1978, only 7% of the sample
felt that they would become the victim of an unarmed assault. This
figure almost doubled in 1998 with 12% of the sample expressing such a
fear. Similarly, the number of people thinking they might become
the victim of an armed assault jumped from 8% in 1978 to 14% in 1998.
These increases were offset by a 10% decrease in the number of Texans who
report being afraid that they will become the victim of a burglary.
Statistical tests were conducted on the 1998 sample and show
that males were significantly more likely than females to report fear that
they would become the victim of vandalism and assault with a weapon.
Also, significantly more males than females reported fear of becoming the
victim of one of the crimes included in the survey. Black/African-American
and Hispanic respondents were significantly more likely to report fear
of becoming the victim of an arson during the next 12 months as were respondents
falling into the lowest income group. When looking at the general
fear of becoming the victim of a crime, however, White and Hispanic respondents
were significantly more likely than Black/African-Americans to report fear
that they would become the victim of at least one of the crimes listed.
Another measure of how fearful people are of crime can be determined
by examining whether or not people are afraid where they live because of
concerns about becoming the victim of a crime. In both 1978 and 1998,
Texans were asked whether or not there was any area within a mile of their
homes where they would be afraid to walk alone at night. Both surveys
also included a question designed to measure how fearful people were of
being in their own homes alone at night. The results from these questions
are reported in Table 3.2. Since the 1978 report included a listing
of responses to these questions by gender and ethnic group membership,
the comparative figures for the 1998 sample are also reported in Table
3.2.
In 1998, considerably fewer Texans were afraid of walking alone
in their neighborhoods or being alone in their homes at night than they
were in 1978. Only about one-third of the 1998 sample reported living
within a mile of an area they would be afraid of walking in at nighttime
compared with over one-half of the 1978 sample. Similarly, only 21%
of the 1998 sample reported that they were afraid of being alone in their
own homes at night compared with 46% of the 1978 sample. Women and
Black/African-American respondents appear to be considerably less afraid
of being alone in their own homes today than they were in 1978. Today,
women also seem to be less afraid of walking alone near their homes at
night than they were in 1978.
Table 3.2 Fear of walking within one mile of home at night
and fear
of being alone in own home at night: 1978 vs. 1998
Questions: Is there any area within one mile of your home where
you would be afraid to walk alone at night because of crime? (Table
shows percent responding “yes”), and Would you say you are afraid to
be in your home at night always, most of the time, sometimes or
never? (Table shows percent responding “sometimes, most of the time,
or always.”)
|
Fear of walking alone at night
White
Sometimes, most of the time, or always afraid of being alone in own
house at night.
White
|
1978
54
54
46
44
|
1998
33
30
21
17
|
There were no statistically significant differences in the way the 1998 sample responded to the question concerning fear of walking within a mile of their home based on their age, level of education, or ethnic background. Women in the 1998 sample were significantly more likely than men to report living within a mile of an area they are afraid of walking in at night. Women, people in the lower income groups, minority group members, and younger people were significantly more likely to report that they sometimes felt afraid of being alone in their own homes at night.
SECTION 4: CURRENT ISSUES FACING THE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
The final section of the 1998 survey included several questions relating to issues that are relevant to today’s Texans. Questions were designed to provide information on what Texans think about: (1) whether or not youths who are charged with crimes should be tried as adults or juveniles; (2) the relationship between the media’s depiction of crime and violence and the actual crime rate; and (3) the public’s position on the death penalty. While each of these issues is particularly salient to the citizenry in 1998, the latter two were also of interest to the public in 1978 as questions focusing on media and crime as well as the death penalty were included in that year’s Texas Crime Poll. When discussing the findings of the 1998 survey, comparative figures from the 1978 survey will also be presented when they are available.
SHOULD JUVENILE OFFENDERS BE TRIED AS ADULTS?
Table 4.1 includes figures showing how respondents to the 1998
survey answered two questions aimed at determining whether or not (and
at what age) Texans would favor trying juvenile offenders in adult courts.
Sixty-nine percent of the respondents stated that they thought juveniles
charged with property crimes should be tried as adults, and 88% favored
handling juvenile offenders charged with personal violent crimes as adults.
More than one-half of the respondents would recommend waiting until juveniles
charged with any type of crime had reached the age of 15 before trying
them as adults. Slightly more than one-third (33%) of the respondents supported
trying juveniles as young as 13 years old who have been charged with personal
violent crimes as adults (see Appendix material for further breakdown of
recommended ages).
Table 4.1 Texans’ Views on Trying Juveniles as Adults
Percent responding:
| Yes | No | Don’t know/Refused | |
|
Property Crimes |
69
Median age recommended = 15 |
27 |
4 |
|
Personal Violent Crimes |
88
Median age recommended = 15
|
9 |
3 |
Statistical tests were conducted to determine whether or not there were any significant associations between the demographic status of the respondents and their position on the handling of juvenile offenders. The figures reported in the Appendix show that there are no significant differences in the way Texans from any of the demographic groups think about this issue. Regardless of the respondent’s age, gender, ethnic status, income, or education, approximately the same proportions recommend trying juveniles as adults.
CRIME AND THE MEDIA
It is interesting to note that the current concerns about the
relationship between crime and violence in the media and the rate of crime
in society is not only a current topic but was also of interest in 1978.
The 1998 survey included three questions designed to determine how closely
associated people think the media’s portrayal of crime and violence is
with the actual rates of crime. Two of these questions focused on
the depiction of crime and violence on television and in the movies, both
of which were also asked in the 1978 survey. The 1998 sample was
also asked how much of a relationship they thought there was between songs
depicting crime and violence and the actual rates of crime.
Table 4.2 shows the percent of Texans in 1978 and 1998 who thought
that the media portrayal of crime and violence caused a large increase
in the crime rate. What is most noteworthy about these findings is the
dramatic increase in the number of Texans who think there is a direct relationship
between media depiction of crime and violence and the actual crime rate.
In 1978, only a little more than one-quarter of the respondents thought
that either movie or television violence was causing a large increase in
the crime rate. In 1998, these figures almost doubled with 47% of
the respondents reporting that showing crime and violence in movies causes
there to be a large increase in the actual rate of crime, and 48% report
similar beliefs about the depiction of crime and violence on television.
Thirty-six percent of the 1998 sample seem to have similar views about
the music media.
Table 4.2 Opinions regarding crime and violence in the
media: 1978 vs. 1998
Questions: Do you think that crime and violence shown on ______ (interviewers inserted “television” first, followed by “movies”) have caused a large increase in the crime rate, caused a moderate increase in the crime rate, caused very little increase in the crime rate, or had no effect on the crime rate? and Do you think that songs about crime and violence have caused . . .? (Table shows percent of respondents who responded “caused a large increase in the crime rate.”)
|
1978
1998
Movies 25 47 Television 28 48 Music not asked 36 |
Younger people were significantly less likely to associate any of the different media with crime rates than were older people. For example, only 32% of the 18- to 29-year-olds in the 1998 sample thought there was a large increase in the crime rates due to violence and crime in the movies compared to 55% of those who were 50 years of age or older. Similar statistically significant differences were found for television and music media as well. Black/African-Americans were also significantly less likely to draw an association between the media’s portrayal of crime and violence and changes in the crime rates. There were no statistically significant associations across any of the other demographic groupings.
SUPPORT FOR THE DEATH PENALTY
Whether or not people support the use of the death penalty has
always been of interest, and the figures reported in Table 4.3 show that
in the 1998 survey, 83% supported its use compared to 79% in 1978.
Direct comparisons across the twenty year period cannot be made, however,
because the exact question wording used to collect these data was not the
same for both years. In 1978, respondents were asked, “Are you in
favor of the death penalty being available for the following crimes (six
crimes were mentioned, one of which was murder).” In 1998, the respondents
were asked, “Do you support the death penalty for the crime of murder?”
The apparent differences across the two years could be attributed to differences
in the question wording.
Table 4.3 Support for the death penalty: 1978 vs. 1998
|
1978
1998
Yes 79 83 No 19 14 Don’t know/Refused 2 3 |
Recent attention has been given to whether or not Texans support the use of the death penalty in cases involving women or juvenile offenders. This year’s survey included two questions designed to address this issue. Table 4.4 shows how Texans responding to the 1998 survey felt about these questions. Clearly, the public’s support for the death penalty in general is not affected by the gender of the murderer. Almost 80% of Texas’ citizens say they support the death penalty for women convicted of murder. Reflecting back on Table 4.3, 83% of the citizens supported the death penalty for murder without any mention of the gender of the convicted murderer. The difference between these two figures is negligible.
Table 4.4 Support for the death penalty for women and juveniles
convicted of murder (1998 sample only)
| Percent who:
Support Oppose Don’t know/Refused
|
|
|
When asked whether or not juveniles convicted of murder should
be given the death penalty, the level of public support for the sanction
clearly diminishes. Only 49% of those surveyed believed that juveniles
should be given this sanction while 42% clearly opposed its use.
Among those who did support the use of the death penalty for juveniles
convicted of murder, the most frequently mentioned “minimum age” for its
use was 16 years old, representing 13% of those who support the death penalty
for juveniles and identified a minimum age for its application. Another
13% were uncertain about a minimum age and responded “don’t know” when
asked to specify one. While some citizens say they are willing to
execute children five years old or younger (5% of those who specified an
age), most of the people supporting the use of the death penalty would
restrict its use to 16- or 17-year-olds (45% of those specifying an age).
One-third of the respondents who suggested a minimum age would be willing
to apply the death sentence to juveniles 13 years of age or younger.
Tests for statistically significant differences across demographic
groups concerning the application of the death penalty to women or juveniles
show that in both cases women and Black/African-Americans are the least
likely to support the sanction’s use. Males, White respondents, and
those with the highest levels of both income and education are the most
likely to support the application of the death penalty in cases involving
women or juvenile offenders.
Public opinion research has long demonstrated that people’s thoughts
about the use of the death penalty are not accurately measured through
the use of simple, single-focused questions such as those represented in
Table 4.3 and Table 4.4. Studies consistently show that people’s
support for the death penalty varies depending upon whether or not there
exists a “true life sentence without the opportunity for parole” as an
alternative sanction. In order to determine the “true” level of support
Texans have for the death penalty, all respondents who initially said “yes”
(n = 446) when asked “Do you support the death penalty for the crime of
murder?” were asked whether or not they would continue to support the sanction
if a “true life sentence without the possibility for parole” were available.
A similar follow-up question was asked of all respondents who initially
said “don’t know” or who refused to answer the initial question (n=20).
Figures in Table 4.5 show that 73% of the respondents who initially
supported the death penalty continued their support, even with the availability
of a “true life sentence.” Twenty-eight percent of those who were
initially uncertain about their position shifted to support for the death
penalty after the follow-up question, and when combined, these respondents
represent the “true death penalty supporters” who make up 60% of the entire
sample. Twenty-one percent of the respondents who initially supported
the death penalty said that they would be more likely to oppose its use
if there were a “true life sentence” as an option available, and another
24% of those who were initially uncertain became opposers after the follow-up
question. Adding these two groups to those who initially opposed
the death penalty shows that 31% of the sample would oppose the death penalty
if there were a “true life sentence” as an option. Nine percent of the
sample remained uncertain about the death penalty, even if there were a
“true life sentence” available.
Table 4.5 Support for the death penalty vs. “life imprisonment
without the possibility for parole” (1998 sample only)
Percent:
|
Original death penalty supporters Originally uncertain about the death penalty
Texans’ true position on the death penalty if there were a “true life
sentence” option
|
|
|
|
Statistical tests show that there are no significant differences
in the levels of “true death penalty supporters” within the different education
and gender groups. Older respondents, Whites and Hispanics, and respondents
from the highest income groups were significantly more likely to be “true
death penalty supporters” than were respondents from other demographic
groups.
Table 4.6 shows whether or not people would support legislation
designed to establish a “true life sentence without the possibility for
parole.” Only 46% of Texans said they would support legislation replacing
the death penalty with a “true life sentence,” while 74% would support
legislation creating a “true life sentence” while continuing to retain
the death penalty as a sentencing option. White and Hispanic respondents,
those respondents with the highest levels of education, and those with
the lowest levels of income were significantly more likely to support legislation
that would replace the death penalty with a “true life sentence.”
White respondents were also significantly more likely to support legislation
creating a “true life sentence” as an additional sanction while retaining
the death penalty as an option. None of the other differences across
the different demographic groups were statistically significant.
Table 4.6 Support for legislation establishing a sentence
of
“life in prison without the possibility for parole”
(1998 sample only)
|
|
|
|
|
Yes No Don’t know/Refused
|
|
|
Appendix material can be accessed through the World Wide Web at
http://www.shsu.edu/cjcenter/College/srpdex.html or you may either write
or call the Survey Research Program at the address or number listed in
the front of this report.
Appendix A includes a description of the sampling design.
Appendix B includes copies of all cross-tabulations used to determine
the statistical significance of apparent associations between variables.