Unfortunately I'll have to translate what people like al see when you note the above.
"@@@@ ^^^^ &&&&**(()) )()(*&&^%% ^GHKHFGH #^*(JGR$ I(&&^$ DFH&%$$ *&^(KHFV JHGGFTT"
No, we see a stupid statement. If this is our philosophy, then let's just go around killing people--after all, if it is a individualized criminal deterrent, then it really doesn't matter whether or not that person is guilty of a crime because we're concerned about deterrence--which looks towards the future. I don't think anyone seriously argues that the death penalty is about deterrence.
No, the death penalty is about revenge--pure and simple. Even if retribution is moral--and I'm not saying that it is--then it ought to be applied fairly and consistently. It isn't.
No Pub we DON'T see a stupid statement.
Shall I translate it to Latin for you?
Who exactly do you think you are?
I won't be lectured by someone like you as to what I should think wrt the DP as deterrent.
What's with you people who have to equate those you differ with as being "stupid"?
Would you like to have me treat you with the same disrespect?
I can do that.
What language do you speak?
Here is a hypothetical: you kill someone.
You are tried and found guilty.
You are executed.
You never kill again.
This is not about revenge.
You have been deterred from killing again.
How can you say the death penalty is not about deterrence?
Hopefully it may also serve as an example to others that if
they commit a capital crime the state may deter them from
doing it again.