- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Biden stopped the executions of 37 men. Trump's DOJ wants to punish them
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:00 pm to 4cubbies
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:00 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
What’s odd to me is that instead of engaging the substance, several posters have opted to hurl insults and claim I’m “making this up,” without attempting to discredit it through even a cursory search.
Allow me:
quote:
Writing in the 18th century, the Italian criminologist Cesare Beccaria argued that deterrence in the criminal justice system was basically a function of the certainty of punishment, not its severity, a conclusion that still resonates today. Think about how we drive on a highway. Virtually all of us drive over the speed limit to some extent, but if there’s an increased presence of state troopers patrolling on a holiday weekend most of us will slow down. That’s because the certainty of punishment has increased and we’re trying to avoid getting a ticket. But if the legislature has recently increased the severity of punishment, by raising the fine for speeding, that will have little effect. Most of us will be unaware of that change, and we’re not expecting to be caught anyway.
The recent report by the National Research Council on The Growth of Incarceration in the United States: Exploring Causes and Consequences, a comprehensive assessment by the nation’s leading criminologists, confirms these findings on deterrence. The report concludes that “all of the evidence on the deterrent effect of certainty of punishment pertains to the deterrent effect of the certainty of apprehension, not to the certainty of postarrest outcomes (including certainty of imprisonment given conviction).”
That's an insanely simplistic review that very much shows how shallow your logical approach is to the subject.
Of course certainty of punishment also deters crime. You've taken that logical statement and falsely concluded that harshness of punishment does not.
To use your insane example, if the chances of getting caught speeding were 5 times as likely, but the punishment for getting caught speeding was a 1 dollar fine with no insurance repercussions, you'd get a ton more speeding. Or, if the chances of getting caught was the same but the cost was $2K fine and a loss of your drivers license for six months, you'd get a lot less speeding.
Is this over-simplistic analysis really the basis of your opinion? Is it really that shallow?
1
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:04 pm to moneyg
quote:
...of trying to justify your insane conclusion based on a moral high ground that you don't even believe.
You're saying I don't believe humans possess God-given human dignity?
quote:
I accuse you of not caring about victims by your relative lack of posts expressing concern for victims vs. your concern for the punishment of violent criminals. It's clear. You can't run from your post history.
You're saying that a lack of evidence of me posting memorials to crime victims is actually evidence that I don't care about any crime victims?
You must not care about babies born addicted to drugs. Or pesticides in drinking water. Or any number of things that I haven't seen you explicitly post about. You can't be serious.
quote:I don't believe the government should have the authority to execute its own citizens. i believe in the sanctity of life from conception to natural death.
then why do you care about a person doing hard time for the rest of their life vs. not so hard time for the rest of their life. Why do you care about a person getting the death penalty vs. doing a life sentence? All of those outcomes result in the same number of future victims (zero). So, with that in mind, why do you care?
quote:
Be careful how you answer that. It's going to reveal your true intentions and show that your motivation has nothing to do with the victims.
OK...
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:05 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
So stopping repeat offenders doesn’t improve public safety? Well holy shite all those people that were victimized by people with previous arrests sure will feel better now.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:05 pm to 4cubbies
Dignity!
I say release all your prisoners in your yard. Make your children play in said yard
I say release all your prisoners in your yard. Make your children play in said yard
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:07 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
i believe in the sanctity of life from conception to natural death.
I didn't know you were pro-life and against abortion at any stage.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:14 pm to moneyg
quote:
That's an insanely simplistic review that very much shows how shallow your logical approach is to the subject.
Of course certainty of punishment also deters crime. You've taken that logical statement and falsely concluded that harshness of punishment does not.
To use your insane example, if the chances of getting caught speeding were 5 times as likely, but the punishment for getting caught speeding was a 1 dollar fine with no insurance repercussions, you'd get a ton more speeding. Or, if the chances of getting caught was the same but the cost was $2K fine and a loss of your drivers license for six months, you'd get a lot less speeding.
Is this over-simplistic analysis really the basis of your opinion? Is it really that shallow?
You’re arguing against a position I haven’t taken.
I am not claiming that punishment severity is irrelevant at the margins or that a $1 fine for speeding would be effective. That’s a straw man. Every serious criminologist acknowledges there is a baseline level of punishment required for a law to have meaning.
The claim (supported by hundreds of years of research) is that once that baseline is met, increasing harshness yields rapidly diminishing returns, especially for serious crimes. At that point, certainty of detection and enforcement are the meaningful deterrents.
Your speeding example actually reinforces this. Most people already know speeding carries fines, insurance consequences, and potential license loss, yet we still speed routinely. What changes behavior is visible enforcement, not legislatures quietly increasing penalties. Troopers on the road, speed traps, and cameras change behaviors. Not laws. That’s why behavior changes immediately when enforcement presence increases, even though the penalties haven’t changed at all.
More importantly, you’re using a minor regulatory offense analogy in a discussion about violent crime, where the decision-making context is completely different. Murder, assault, and robbery are not crimes where people sit down and do a rational cost-benefit analysis of sentence length. Most offenders do not expect to be caught, do not know the exact penalty, and are acting under emotional, situational, or impaired conditions (which is exactly why harsher sentencing is an ineffective deterrent).
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:14 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
You're saying I don't believe humans possess God-given human dignity?
Correct. You are pretending that you believe that because you think it strengthens your argument.
quote:
You're saying that a lack of evidence of me posting memorials to crime victims is actually evidence that I don't care about any crime victims?
Try and keep up. This isn't complicated. You asked what the basis of my opinion that you don't care about victims. You asked if my opinion was based on "not equating justice with maximal suffering". I clarified that my opinion is based on your incessant concern about the punishment of violent criminals with very little (probably zero) expressed concern for victims. To put another way, I'm basing my assessment of your beliefs on the history of opinions you've expressed on the subject.
quote:
You must not care about babies born addicted to drugs. Or pesticides in drinking water. Or any number of things that I haven't seen you explicitly post about. You can't be serious.
Do I have a looooong history of being an apologist for mothers who are addicted to drugs...or of companies polluting drinking water? FFS, your ability to logically compare simple things is ridiculously limited. quote:
I don't believe the government should have the authority to execute its own citizens.
ah, so now it's not about limiting victims. It's about a limit to government authority.
quote:
i believe in the sanctity of life from conception to natural death.
no you don't.
quote:
OK...
you ran from the question. Noted.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:15 pm to Smeg
quote:
I didn't know you were pro-life and against abortion at any stage.
People operate off of tons of baseless assumptions here, so I'm not surprised.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:17 pm to moneyg
She is a phony.
Haven't figured it out yet?
Haven't figured it out yet?
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:20 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
So stopping repeat offenders doesn’t improve public safety? Well holy shite all those people that were victimized by people with previous arrests sure will feel better now.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:20 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
You’re arguing against a position I haven’t taken.
I am not claiming that punishment severity is irrelevant at the margins
Your first sentence of the OP...
quote:
We already know, conclusively, that harsher punishments do not deter crime
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:23 pm to Jbird
quote:
She is a phony.
Haven't figured it out yet?
She is not. She's definitely sincere.
She just doesn't logic well.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:27 pm to moneyg
quote:She knows her shite is phony, it's why she ignores posts that punch holes in her horseshite.
She is not. She's definitely sincere.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:29 pm to 4cubbies
I’m interested in locking up the repeat violent offenders. That sure seems like a can’t fail way to prevent crime and victimization. If tomorrow every 3+ time violent offender was locked up would that not make society safer?
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:31 pm to FlySaint
quote:
The current criminal justice system is an abject failure, PRIMARILY due to insane, woke policies. The main problem is the lack of sufficient incarceration of known repeat violent criminals due to “racism”. Democrat activist DAs and judges intentionally put known animals back on the street over and over again, directly imperiling the public.
Liberals like 4cub do not care about real victims.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:33 pm to 4cubbies
If they're bad enough for a death sentence they're bad enough for Supermax.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:39 pm to djsdawg
The only victims are the incarcerated in 4dummies world.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:42 pm to RCDfan1950
quote:
The idea of Mercy for the truly unrepentant or worse, essentially heathen sociopaths unable to bridle their pernicious instincts is both suicidal and immoral, as such policy increases the odds that more INNOCENTS will be harmed.
Whatever we tolerate we get more of. Period.
Cubbies love more innocents being harmed because the real victim is the attacker.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:43 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Condescension noted
I mean you did say conclusive...
Thats quite condescending to any difference of view.
.
quote:
there are no criminology classes offered at my university.
quote:
I finished my coursework last year anyway.
...
If you at least took a class in statistics that would cover all of this.
Still shocked there is a university that doesnt offer a criminal justice class...
Or are they just called something different like Law and Society.
Really?
quote:
Cesare Beccaria
Yes, he had a number of ideas, not sure how he defends your point, he was an advocate without data.
quote:
The period when the Supreme Court paused executions (early 1970s) did coincide with rising crime,
1967, but they had dropped before that.
quote:
which researchers see as much more plausible drivers of homicide trends than execution policy alone.
You realize that was what got them published.
Left wing universities were committed to Left wing social theory.
Of course your researchers will attempt to claim this is disproven.
These people are and were advocates, trying to find an alternative to a straight trend line.
Yes thats the secret of Statistics, you can make anything statistically significant or not significant by just playing with the numbers, looking to slice data a little differently.
But remember above all else,
quote:
THAT CAPITAL PUNISHMENT BOTH REDUCES THE CERTAINTY OF MURDERERS BEING CONVICTED FOR THEIR CRIMES, AND INCREASES THE PROSPECT THAT PLEA BARGAINING WILL CAUSE PERSONS TO BE CONVICTED OF MURDERS THEY DID NOT COMMIT. THERE IS EVEN EVIDENCE THAT SOME PERSONS ARE PROMPTED TO KILL WHEN EXECUTIONS ARE PUBLICIZED.
The deterrence of the death penalty is undermined by people like yourself who will try to prevent these executions at all cost.
And even then your abstract admits.
quote:
THUS THE DEATH PENALTY SEEMS TO PRODUCE LESS DETERRENCE THAN THE MORE CERTAIN PENALTY OF IMPRISONMENT.
It still produces a deterrence.
If more murderers were indeed executed for their crimes even your abstract agrees that it would reduce murders more than prison alone.
This post was edited on 12/26/25 at 9:50 pm
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:44 pm to moneyg
quote:
moneyg
I appreciate the engagement. I’ll circle back tomorrow.
Page 8 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News