tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5404820640426099135.post5739275212456281643..comments2023-10-31T00:46:35.316+13:00Comments on Anti-Dismal: Jeffrey Miron on the death penaltyPaul Walkerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13731003529546075700noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5404820640426099135.post-89194275426675455092010-06-20T11:35:54.681+12:002010-06-20T11:35:54.681+12:00A problem with the death penalty, not mentioned in...A problem with the death penalty, not mentioned in your post, is that it would be largely people from society's lower socio-economic echelons who suffer it. Partly because they cannot afford high quality legal representation, but also because of the different weights society assigns to different crimes. I went to some fascinating lectures on sociology once where the lecturer talked about the distinction between the crimes of the powerful versus the crimes of the powerless, and also about what is and what is not defined as crime (and who defines it). <br /><br />I suspect, for example, that a psychopathic finance company owner whose actions resulted in the devastation of many lives, including several suicides, would never face the death penalty, but the common garden home invader would.<br /><br />In theory I agree with having a death penalty, because some people do so much harm to others that they simply have no value – actually they have a negative value. But for the reason I have outlined above, and also because witnesses and juries get it wrong sometimes, I would be absolutely against it in practice.dragonflynoreply@blogger.com