Re: Death penalty

> No it isn't vengeance at least it doesn't have to be by definition.  It is
> indeed retribution but that is a very different thing.

In the interest of saving innocent hairs from being split, I'll just
say that the state shouldn't be in the business of retribution *or*
vengeance.

**or justice?

> And there all sorts of value it provides to society the most fundamental
being
> the deterrence that that individual will ever harm anyone again.

That's not deterrence, it's prevention.

**about that splitting hairs thing.,... t t

>  Life imprisonment is no guarantee of that

That's a meaningless argument. If you feel that prisons should be
safer, fair enough. We can discuss that. But it has nothing to do with
this question.

**I don’t think that is what he meant.

> The death penalty in such a case is just punishment.

There's no such thing as "just punishment," as punishment doesn't
create justice.

**no nyut a punishment can be just or unjust.

> The economics argument is irrelevant and probably
> in the current state of appellate law weighs in favor or
> life imprisonment so don't attribute that one to me.

Fair enough, then. It's it's not a deterrent, it's not just, and it's
not economical.

***It is, it is and it is.



-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot