|
|
Subject:
Social Justice - Death Penalty
Category: Relationships and Society > Politics Asked by: charlie604-ga List Price: $2.00 |
Posted:
13 Dec 2004 22:16 PST
Expires: 12 Jan 2005 22:16 PST Question ID: 442314 |
Why do both sides in the death penalty debate reject the deterrence argument? Please answer in paragraph form. |
|
There is no answer at this time. |
|
Subject:
Re: Social Justice - Death Penalty
From: frde-ga on 14 Dec 2004 03:41 PST |
How many sides does a polygon have ? Which debate ? |
Subject:
Re: Social Justice - Death Penalty
From: charlie604-ga on 14 Dec 2004 12:26 PST |
The debate of whether or not a just society should use the death penalty as a punishment for committing a crime. |
Subject:
Re: Social Justice - Death Penalty
From: neilzero-ga on 14 Dec 2004 16:52 PST |
I think it is only common sense that the death penalty is at least a slight deterant. Cruel and unusual punishment is also be at least a slight deterant, but proof is doubtful and it can be argued that there are side effects outweigh the deterant effect. frde is saying there are more than two sides, and a significant number on most of the sides think the death penalty is a deterant and would mention the effect of deterant. Neil |
Subject:
Re: Social Justice - Death Penalty
From: arbitrary-ga on 07 Jan 2005 12:01 PST |
I've read that most studies that support the deterrent effect of the Death penalty are based on econometric modeling which as far as I can tell is a very inconclusive method of predicting things like deterrence. |
If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by emailing us at answers-support@google.com with the question ID listed above. Thank you. |
Search Google Answers for |
Google Home - Answers FAQ - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy |