3 ms·

Umm, no. You said that there was "no rational reasons for the death penalty" because it was a straw man argument that mischaracterizes those you disagree with i

• ugh 16y ago
  “Rational” really might be a misnomer. It wasn’t meant to be an insult. “Moral convictions” are fine reasons. It is, of course, imaginable that there would be “rational” (again, might be the wrong word) reasons for the death penalty. I can imagine a universe where the death penalty increases deterrence, reduces cost and where wrongful convictions are exceedingly rare. I would imagine that it would be very easy to convince technocrats to introduce the death penalty in that universe [+]. All I asserted was that it seems to be consensus among criminologist that we are not in that universe. [+] My own strong moral conviction – which, in this imagined universe wouldn’t be, in my parlance, “rational” – would be to not introduce the death penalty, all those reasons be damned. I can certainly sympathize with those wanting to keep the death penalty in the real universe for moral reasons. I’m nevertheless not really sure whether I really would oppose the death penalty in the imagined universe because I also happen to believe that policies with regard to at least certain human freedoms (I would include “life” and “opinion”) have to have some sort of useful effect on the world beyond making me happy (i.e. being congruent with my moral convictions).