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.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Land Shark who wrote (132889)	8/28/2008 12:41:48 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 173976

"That's what is used as a justification... >>>>>>">The motives of vengeance or any imposition of suffering are not valid justifications for capital punishment and are, in fact, incompatible concepts, as I have stated in the past." Not by me. I've never used vengeance or imposition of suffering as a justification for capital punishment, not ever. "Oh yeah, there's the argument that dead men don't recommit. I don't use that argument either since there are other means to keep them from recommitting... although we don't do that effectively either. "The idea is that if you kill enough, then the population of murderers would decrease.Then there's the deterrence argument. Didn't work in Florida, ... Hasn't worked in Texas either, ,,,." I have not argued this and it is not my position even thought there is some merit to it because, in a relatively civil society there are only a certain percentage inclined to commit heinous acts and when examples are not present or less present, copy cats are less likely to act out. It hasn't ever been implemented that way in America so your examples (Florida, Texas) are inapplicable anyway. And the name calling does nothing but expose your lack of confidence in the merits of the argument you are presenting but feel free.