🚀 go-pugleaf

Robert D. Silverman (bs@gauss.mitre.org) wrote:

: I will not get involved in this debate except to note that as a practical
: matter if you have a death penalty for crimes less severe than murder, then
: it costs the criminal nothing to kill his victim, rather than merely injuring/
: maiming/etc.
: I would expect the number of murders to increase under these conditions.
: If you institute the death penalty for rape (for example), I would expect
: a lot of rapists to kill their victims as well as raping them. Dead victims
: tell no tales and the penalty is the same.
: I think this point is commonly overlooked.

This is a good point.

One might add that this logic holds if the death penality is applied for 
murder in that a person who has already killed once, and thus is subject 
to the death penalty, has no further reason not to kill again to evade 
capture.  Thus, an argument exists in favor of not imposing the death 
penalty except for serial and mass murderers, if at all.

This argument should be given serious consideration by all those who 
would expand the range of crimes for which the death penalty could be 
imposed.