Death Penalty Really Does Work as a Deterrent?

**Husar** · 06-12-2007, 12:13

Originally Posted by LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix

and regularly take chemical castration medicine.

In that case I promote a final solution, it's more secure, needs no controls and should be cheaper. It's meant to be final anyway I guess, so why spend a lot of money on chemicals?

**Fragony** · 06-12-2007, 12:38

Originally Posted by Husar

In that case I promote a final solution, it's more secure, needs no controls and should be cheaper. It's meant to be final anyway I guess, so why spend a lot of money on chemicals?

chemicals and final solutions has proved to be a perfect match though.

Anyway, why are we so surprised, you can only get death penalty for prewhateveritscalled murder right, of course they have considered getting juiced when caught.

**Lorenzo_H** · 06-12-2007, 13:04

I think that if you are crazy enough to commit a crime which carries the death penalty, nothing is going to stop you from doing it.

**Rodion Romanovich** · 06-12-2007, 13:53

Originally Posted by Husar

In that case I promote a final solution, it's more secure, needs no controls and should be cheaper. It's meant to be final anyway I guess, so why spend a lot of money on chemicals?

No, it can be aborted if it turns out the victim was innocent. He also gets a choice to stay in jail.

Anyway, that was an example, and not necessarily my opinion on how the law should do it. Personally, I feel that the communities with low sentences are often more successful at fighting the majority of criminals, whereas they fail miserably at dealing with the serial killers and serial rapers. On average though, this means lower crime statistics because the "light" criminals are much more numerous than the repeated criminals. I'd personally like to see a sound combination of these two systems, in which the low sentence system is the basis, and certain unambigious rules are formed to determine when the system switches to harsher sentences. The best combination might be to just stick to the low sentences for the first offenses, then increase the sentences if the crime is repeated. AFAIK no country is using this sound combination at the moment, but my hypothesis is that this system would be the optimal in reducing the amount of crimes.

**Husar** · 06-12-2007, 15:24

Originally Posted by LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix

No, it can be aborted if it turns out the victim was innocent. He also gets a choice to stay in jail.

The problem is, it can also be aborted if the criminal needs another victim. The damage done to the victim can never be aborted...
Though that depends on how long those chemicals last and whether he is forced to get them under supervision. Haven't heard of cases of criminal paedophiles who were found innocent later on.

**econ21** · 06-12-2007, 15:31

Originally Posted by Husar

Haven't heard of cases of criminal paedophiles who were found innocent later on.

There's a fairly big scandal rumbling in the UK over Operation Ore or some such. The US provided the Uk police with credit card details used for nasty websites. But there's pretty good evidence that many were cases of wholesale id theft (eg lots of "users" paid but never viewed the site - basically the site owners were using stolen cards to get rich). The police were not computer savy enough to realise this and besmirched the good name of quite a few victims of identity theft.

There were also a number of child abuse cases where hundreds of parents were accused of doing nasty things to their kids on clinical evidence that now looks ropey.

**ajaxfetish** · 06-13-2007, 22:03

Originally Posted by econ21

There's a fairly big scandal rumbling in the UK over Operation Ore or some such. The US provided the Uk police with credit card details used for nasty websites. But there's pretty good evidence that many were cases of wholesale id theft (eg lots of "users" paid but never viewed the site - basically the site owners were using stolen cards to get rich). The police were not computer savy enough to realise this and besmirched the good name of quite a few victims of identity theft.

There were also a number of child abuse cases where hundreds of parents were accused of doing nasty things to their kids on clinical evidence that now looks ropey.

Indeed, the prosecution of pedophiles has an emotional charge and willingness to accept unreliable evidence that is sometimes reminiscent of witch trials and the McCarthy days. It is certainly a serious crime, and must be taken seriously, but overzealous prosecutors have stained the reputations of many innocent individuals with assumed guilt and poor evidence.

Ajax