Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: discostu

The argument I made repeatedly: Given a choice of dying or continuing to kill, the perps stopped. Thus, the penalty of death deterred crime. It’s just that simple.


16 posted on 08/07/2012 1:51:52 PM PDT by Darteaus94025
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: Darteaus94025

An executed murderer kills no more.

The leftist freaks form all their opinions based on two things:

Democrat GOOD
Republican BAD


17 posted on 08/07/2012 1:58:14 PM PDT by treetopsandroofs (Had FDR been GOP, there would have been no World Wars, just "The Great War" and "Roosevelt's Wars".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: Darteaus94025

And it’s a bad argument because it’s ignoring lots of important differences between your situation and the actual in practice legal death penalty. There’s a big difference between the threat of being shot NOW and being executed 20 years from now IF caught. As much as I support the death penalty there’s a good reason why the violent crime rate is NOT lower in states with it, the legal system takes too long to make it a threat.

Just look right here at the thread you’re on, AZ IS a death penalty state, didn’t stop Loughner, doesn’t stop about a murder a week here in Tucson, more than that in Phoenix. If we were running the death penalty like in the 50s and 60s with just a couple years between conviction and execution it might deter, but the way it is now it’s not a threat. Something that is not a threat CANNOT deter, since the very nature of deterrence is that it’s the effect of a threat.


18 posted on 08/07/2012 1:59:11 PM PDT by discostu (Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson