> Fine, make it 10-20 instead. Would still push people towards the worse crime to cover their tracks I expect, and wouldn't be a full deterrent because it does

> Fine, make it 10-20 instead. Would still push people towards the worse crime to cover their tracks I expect, and wouldn't be a full deterrent because it doesn't account for people acting under duress that is more dangerous in their mind than what the law is threatening. Furthermore, there is a cost to keeping someone locked up for 10-to-20. Do you want to pay that out of your taxes? Because that is where it would come from. > But clearly the punishments we have now are too lenient to be effective. People still steal in places where the punishment is losing a hand or being stoned to death. What do you propose that would be a greater deterrent than those?