🚀 go-pugleaf

Dave Skeen (dls@meaddata.com) wrote:
: In article <alcasselCI512n.B58@netcom.com> alcassel@netcom.com (Alan Cassel) writes:
:    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.

: We could also use this logic to torture serial murderers before
: killing them.  So, they would fear the slow, excruciating death
: (perhaps flaying them alive), and this would induce them to stop at
: one murder.

How true.  And I suppose that, if you were the executioner appointed to
inflict this punishment, that you would already have an excuse for
yourself ready and prepared to give to your maker when it was your time to
go. 

The Constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment of the
type you hypothesize exists for good and sufficient reasons.  Even so,
there are, today, some people who seem to be in favor of such punishment. 
It appears that these people may have to be pulled kicking and screaming
into the late 18th century. 

I certainly would not like to live in the society you hypothesize.