Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site qubix.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!qubix!lab
From: lab@qubix.UUCP (Larry Bickford)
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Value of Human Life vs. Value of Property
Message-ID: <537@qubix.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 23-Sep-83 16:44:53 EDT
Article-I.D.: qubix.537
Posted: Fri Sep 23 16:44:53 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 25-Sep-83 13:17:26 EDT
References: <2905@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Organization: Qubix Graphic Systems, Saratoga, CA
Lines: 22

According the arguments I've seen here, horse-stealing would not
be a capital offense as it was in the 1800's.

But it seems that all of you have forgotten the reason for capital
punishment - and why the use of force is justified in protecting
property (quoth the executioner):
	"You are not being hanged for stealing horses --
	 you are being hanged that horses might not be stolen."

Crime really follows a basic economic model - is the potential gain greater
than the potential loss? Potential loss arises from two factors: certainty
and severity of punishment. Between trial lawyers and trial and appellate
judges, these have been severely limited in the U.S., lowering the
potential cost and thus increasing the likelihood of the would-be criminal
to go ahead with his plans. However, if w-b-c knows that someone in the
vicinity of the crime is likely to do something (perhaps severe) to him, 
the potential cost goes up, so the likelihood of the crime goes down.

The best time to stop a crime is BEFORE it happens.

Larry Bickford,		{amd70,ittvax}!qubix!lab
	  {ihnp4,ucbvax,decvax}!decwrl!qubix!lab