re: Saudi Arabia executes 81 convicts

quote:

---

Yes, the one where we don’t penalize crime because people still commit crime, so obviously it doesn’t work.

Don’t get pissy at me because you formed a poor argument on a ridiculous premise, even though this is your day job.

---

Oh, that one was so stupid that I ignored it. But since you insist...

Deterrence is only one aspect of criminal sentencing. Most literature on the subject outlines the prongs as follows:

1. Deterrence - By punishing this individual, it will deter others from committing this same crime in the future, because they don't want to receive this penalty
2. Separation - We will keep the community, the offender, or both, safe by keeping the offender and the community separate
3. Rehabilitation - We will prepare the individual to return to society
4. Punishment - Separate and apart from any practical benefit, we believe this person deserves to be punished for this action, simply because punishment is justified
5. Retribution - And by levying this punishment, we hope to sate the community, and particularly the victim/victim's tribe, in hopes they won't attempt to mete out justice on their own

So, even if there is no deterrent effect, there are still reasons for criminal punishment.

But, to elaborate more on deterrence, the literature basically shows that creating a penalty, any penalty, markedly reduces the targeted behavior as compared to having no penalty at all. Then, as you increase the penalty (assuming you publicize it to the point that everyone knows what the penalty is), the targeted behavior continues to decrease, but it very quickly hits a plateau, which makes sense from a practical perspective. Someone might choose to risk behavior in which they think there is a real likelihood that they will be caught and sentenced to, say, two years. However, they are staggeringly unlikely to have the same thought process if they believe they will be caught and sentenced to twenty years. But is the calculus really any different if the sentence is thirty years? Or fifty? Or 99?

That difference matters a tremendous amount after they are caught and are facing sentencing, but not really before. To the average free person, the idea of serving two decades in jail might as well be a lifetime. In either case, if the person thought there was a significant probability of their being caught and sentenced as such, they likely wouldn't engage in the behavior. If they engage in the behavior regardless, they either aren't thinking at all, or don't think they will be caught. Either way, the sentence is irrelevant.

Now, to bring it full circle, simply because a particular sentence doesn't have an increased deterrent effect relative to another sentence doesn't necessarily mean that it has no purpose. But, anyone arguing for increased punishments beyond that plateau point should argue relying on other factors instead of parroting the old, unsupported deterrent line.

But this is why Gish Gallops are effective. You spit out one stupid line, and I had to burn four paragraphs in response. But hey, maybe this will just become one of the posts I copy/paste on occasion when someone trots out the same nonsense

quote:

---

If they engage in the behavior regardless, they either aren't thinking at all, or don't think they will be caught. Either way, the sentence is irrelevant.

---

This described the perpetrators of most violent crime in America.

quote:

---

"Links to terrorist groups"

---

I mean it is SA, so that's not exactly a stretch. They have been playing both sides of the aisle for a while now.

Muh prison overcrowding!!!11

Not everything is bad in the middle east.

No wonder they refused to talk to Biden on the phone. Too busy.

Things started going downhill for Saudi Arabia when they started letting women drive

quote:

---

You still don't get it, do you?

All the stuff NeoCons did to try and stick it to the libs are now tools used by Democrats, and they do it much better because they control more institutions.

Maybe just start promoting freedom and leave it at that?

---

Three paragraphs and you still couldn’t answer his question

Why do y’all always avoid the tough questions?

quote:

---

quote:
Saudi Arabia justice system >>>> US justice system


I read comments like this and wonder why our founders even decided to rebel against their monarchy.

---

Because for a lot of people the Constitution only matters if it cuts the way they want it to.