> While I tend to agree with you, Tom, due to lack of convincing evidence > of death-penalty deterrent power, I have heard people make a reasonable > argument. It it along the lines I just suggested -- the death penalty > acts as a deterrent to homicide and thus saves the lives of a certain > number of innocent people; if this number of lives saved is greater than > the number of innocent people executed, then there is a net gain in > innocent lives saved. >
I'm sorry, that utilitarian argument is, to me, despicable. First of all, you should not do evil that good may come of it. Second, if an innocent person is executed, the real killer is out there and may kill again. Third, there is no possible way to add up the putative "deterrent "effect and the lives thereby saved versus actual innocent people wrongly executed. Fourth, if we truly believe in justice, how can we say, 'Sorry, bud, yeah, you're probably innocent, but we have to torch you just in case doing so may someday somehow save someone else even though we're not really sure if this will actually work.' Come on. The way to save lives is to catch the REAL criminals. And to make ours a more just society so fewer people will turn to crime - and we can focus limited police resources on those few hardened, recalcitrant bad people who remain. (And by the way: there is no evidence of any kind that anyone can summon up that will support the idea that the death penalty acts as a deterrent. But even if it did, it is still evil to execute an innocent person.) Tom Beck www.prydonians.org www.mercerjewishsingles.org "I always knew I'd see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed I'd see the last." - Dr Jerry Pournelle _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
