Lecture Notes - 070606 - Katie Kerr PHL 304 July 6, 2006...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Katie Kerr PHL 304 July 6, 2006 Common Sense, the Deterrent Effect of the Death Penalty and the Best Bet  Argument Jeffrey Reiman I. Critique of the Common Sense Argument - Wrong Assumption “continuously rising disinclination premise” Contrary Common  Sense: The deterrence impact of a penalty rises without limit  in proportion to  the fearfulness of the penalty. There is a limit: True only within a certain range. Whoever would be deterred by a given likelihood of death would be  deterred by an equal likelihood  of life behind bars. It is implausible that criminals do cost-benefit analyses in which every  increment of cost and every increment of benefit are taken into  account. - “Death in the street” counterexample It is worse (more fearful) to be shot to death in the street when committing  a crime than being trialed and executed. Criminals are more likely to be killed when committing a crime than caught 
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/21/2008 for the course PHIL 304 taught by Professor Roddy during the Summer '07 term at University of Texas at Austin.

Page1 / 2

Lecture Notes - 070606 - Katie Kerr PHL 304 July 6, 2006...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online