RECENT INVESTIGATIONS INTO THE DETERRENT EFFECT OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND THE ASSESSMENT OF ITS RELATIVE IMPORTANCE EVOKED A WAVE OF CRITICISM AND OBJECTIONS TO THE BELIEF THAT PUNISHMENT DETERS CRIME. SPECIFICALLY, PASSEL AND TAYLOR ARGUE, IN AN UNPUBLISHED PAPER, THAT ACCEPTANCE OF EHRLICH'S ANALYSIS AND RESULTS FROM HIS TIME SERIES INVESTIGATION OF MURDER LEADS TO THE CONCLUSION THAT EXECUTIONS ACTUALLY ENCOURAGE MURDERS, RATHER THAN DETER THEM. CAREFUL EVALUATION OF THEIR APPROACH, HOWEVER, REVEALS THAT IN THEIR HASTE TO TURN UPSIDE DOWN THE NEW EVIDENCE ON THE EFFECT OF PUNISHMENT IN GENERAL AND OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN PARTICULAR, CRITICS OF THE ECONOMIC APPROACH HAVE COMMITTED SERIOUS ERRORS OF LOGIC AND SUBSTANCE. EMPIRICAL RESULTS DERIVED THROUGH AN ECONOMIC IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DETERRENCE THEORY DO NOT BEAR DIRECTLY ON POLICY MATTERS; THE EMPIRICAL WORK HAS SOUGHT PRINCIPALLY TO TEST SPECIFIC BEHAVIORAL IMPLICATIONS EMANATING FROM THE ECONOMIC MODEL OF DETERRENCE WHICH DISTINGUISHED IT FROM ALTERNATIVE THEORIES. SIMILARLY, THE PROBABILITIES OF APPREHENSION, CONVICTION, EXECUTION, AND SANCTIONS CAN BE DETERMINED THROUGH APPROPRIATE ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES FOR PRODUCTION OF THE RELEVANT MEANS OF DETERRENCE AND INCAPACITATION. THESE ESTIMATES CAN BE USED TO INDICATE WHAT THE OVERALL EFFECT OF A COMPREHENSIVE POLICY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT CONCERNING ALL OF THESE DETERRENCE VARIABLES WILL BE. EVEN IF EFFECTIVE AS A DETERRENT, CAPITAL PUNISHMENT MAY NOT BE SOCIALLY DESIRABLE. HOWEVER, THE ANALYSIS OF POLICY IMPLICATIONS MUST BE BASED ON VALID SCIENTIFIC PRINCIPLES, NOT ON MISCONCEPTIONS AND MISINTERPRETATIONS TO SUPPORT A PARTICULAR POSITION. APPENDIXES, FOOTNOTES, STATISTICAL TABULAR DATA, AND MATHEMATICAL FORMULAS ARE INCLUDED. (LKM)