Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (81877)	6/16/2000 7:55:00 AM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

I quite agree that proportionality is necessary. I just don't see why the gravest level in the chain of proportionality must be death. I don't think that moving the gravest level from death to life imprisonment should disrupt the basic principle of proportionality any more than moving the gravest level from hanging, drawing, and quartering to simple execution did. I argued that we begin with the premise that it is fitting, and then work from there. I find this premise impossible to accept. I would prefer the conservative position that the State should kill its citizens only when it is necessary for it to do so. I would say that those who want the State to kill are the ones who should have to demonstrate that the killing in question is necessary or desirable.