[frankiekitty]

I chose your article instead one of the other five or six listed on my search engine; because yours was the only one, which gave a complete list and description of each level of Dr. Stone's depravity scale. I think, like myself, that is what the readers, the ones who gave such unexpected responses, were after. Dr. Stone may have a website, but I haven't found it yet.

I believe that Dr. Stone's attempts to simplify the sentencing process for juries is misguided. I am not an attorney. I am a social worker. As a social worker; I have extensive experience working with convicted murders and other types of violent offenders.

Tonight, I am viewing a documentary on Dennis Rader, aka BTK. I believe that Dr. Stone would definitely place this individual very high on his scale, perhaps a 22. BTK tortured his victims for the purpose of sexual gratification. He is clearly a sociopath. His crimes are inexplicable. But can all of his acts be chalked up to free will, to evil? I'm sorry I think that's a cop out. Until we understand why individuals commit such inexplicable acts; we will be unable to stop them from reoccurring. What we do know is that those who do commit such acts are clearly not in their right minds. So, what makes Dr. Stone or anyone else think that harsh punishment will be an effective deterrent. Execution is supposed to be a deterrent, right? We don't execute out of a need for vengeance, do we? After all, acts of vengence are "evil", acts, aren't they?

Perhaps this is not the type of discussion you hoped to generate with your article. Perhaps you wanted to keep things strictly legal. In this case; I don't think that's possible.

[Stoat]

But can all of his acts be chalked up to free will, to evil?

That doesn't concern me nearly as much as making sure that he never has the opportunity to harm another person.

 I'm sorry I think that's a cop out. Until we understand why individuals commit such inexplicable acts; we will be unable to stop them from reoccurring.

As long as humans are given any amount of freedom whatsoever, there will always be crime and criminals.  Humans are flawed, and some flaws are worse than others.  Government and Society is not charged with doing nothing unless it has the one magic answer that addresses all conceivable root causes, it is charged with protecting the innocent in the best manner possible given the knowledge and accepted sciences of the time.  Until a magic solution is found that works better, the criminal justice system as we have it is a good start.  It would be a whole lot better if it were not watered down by people who think that treating criminals leniently will somehow reduce crime.  We tried that in the 1960's and 1970's and it was a dismal failure.

So, what makes Dr. Stone or anyone else think that harsh punishment will be an effective deterrent.

I wouldn't pretend to speak for Dr. Stone or anyone else, but most people I know think that harsh punishment is a better deterrent than lax punishment

Execution is supposed to be a deterrent, right?

Yes, and it works quite well as a deterrent providing it's done swiftly and isn't drawn out for 20+ years by endless appeals as it typically is now.  When that's done, it's not much of a deterrent, which of course is the entire goal of the organizations funding and pushing for the endless appeals.

When it doesn't work as a deterrent, it still works quite well in preventing that particular criminal from ever harming another person again..

We don't execute out of a need for vengeance, do we?

I don't have a problem with controlled and thoughtful vengeance, because it is a reflection of society's regard for the innocent.

 After all, acts of vengence are "evil", acts, aren't they?

I suppose that depends upon which star you follow.

Perhaps this is not the type of discussion you hoped to generate with your article.

I didn't have any preconceived notions of what sort of discussion I wanted. 

 Perhaps you wanted to keep things strictly legal. In this case; I don't think that's possible.

As I mentioned previously, I'm not an attorney and so I had no such expectations.  I'm not sure where that supposition comes from.