I have discovered the ‘reblog’ button. I can now steal Wintery’s wonderful posts when I don’t have time to write any or don’t think I need to repeat what he has said.
That said, I think it’s pretty obvious that associating a wrong action with negative (and costly) consequences should prevent people from engaging in said action.

WINTERY KNIGHT

This post has a twin post which talks about the evidence against capital punishment from the Bible.

Why do people support the death penalty? Because research conducted by multiple teams of scholars at multiple universities have shown that capital punishment deters crime.

Excerpt:

“Science does really draw a conclusion. It did. There is no question about it,” said Naci Mocan, an economics professor at the University of Colorado at Denver. “The conclusion is there is a deterrent effect.”

A 2003 study he co-authored, and a 2006 study that re-examined the data, found that each execution results in five fewer homicides, and commuting a death sentence means five more homicides. “The results are robust, they don’t really go away,” he said. “I oppose the death penalty. But my results show that the death penalty (deters) — what am I going to do, hide them?”

Statistical studies like his are…

View original post 962 more words

Advertisements

Published by

Tracy

I’m Tracy

4 thoughts on “”

  1. Just a thought…
    My 3rd son is an excellent example of this concept. Starting from the time he could get into stuff he shouldn’t, it became obvious that he didn’t care about threats, calls of “NO!” or attempts to distract him. Amazingly (to this mother’s mind), all it took to redirect him was a light swat on his thigh (as close to the gluteus maximus as possible with a diaper).
    It was so gentle that my hand didn’t sting, but he got the point in a way that losing my temper and yelling wouldn’t do.
    I know it’s a tiny example compared to snuffing out a life, but it is the same idea of physical consequences.

  2. “We just don’t have enough data to say anything,” said Justin Wolfers, an economist at the Wharton School of Business who last year co-authored a sweeping critique of several studies, and said they were “flimsy” and appeared in “second-tier journals.”

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,280215,00.html#ixzz25jLW2lZx

    I note that neither you nor Wintery Knight missed perhaps the most important part of the article. That’s right the bit that pointed out what a pile of rubbish it was.

    1. [begin sarcasm]

      So, let me get this straight. A series of studies by several economists strongly argue that the death penalty has significant power as a deterrent, In fact, these studies claim to be conclusive and the economists believe the issue to be settled. However, one economist said that the studies -all of them – were flimsy and, bingo! that settles it. Let’s throw out all the studies, then. [End sarcasm]

      I don’t think truth is found that way. The studies are not flimsy just because one guy said so. If you really want to argue that the research is questionable, give good reasons for thinking so. An appeal to authority is a bad idea when the authority you cite hold a minority position among his peers.

What did you think of my post?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s