Not long ago, "murderers and child rapists should have to live with what they've done" was considered a perfectly reasonable defense of an abolitionist position on the death penalty. It's interesting to notice the new pushback against "maximum punishment" for even the worst crime https://twitter.com/Vanessa_ABee/status/1218019316454563840 …
-
-
That is a plausible argument. The inconsistency looks something like: If our evidence isn't good enough to sentence someone to death, it's not good enough to sentence someone to life either. You're right that the "correctability" of life sentences is a major plus.
-
There are unavoidable tradeoffs, here — I don't think "good enough" is the right frame, because the passive position is not *nothing,* it's potentially subjecting society to continued exposure to a person who kills for fun or personal gain.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.