> if anyone is unsure if harsher sentencing cuts crime, Medieval times are a pretty strong argument against
But it sure was 100% effective against repeat offenses. Not like for instance the French system where someone can plot a terror attack, get sentenced to 8 years of prison (a shamefully low duration to begin with) and then do it again (possibly one the attacker role this time). In a way death penalty exists, but is reserved to the victims of previous convicts.
Per the article above, Oxford’s homicide rate is believed to have been _one hundred times_ higher than today (though this was exceptional; normal rate was moe like 10x higher). Not really great evidence for the ol’ state-sanctioned murder.
But it sure was 100% effective against repeat offenses. Not like for instance the French system where someone can plot a terror attack, get sentenced to 8 years of prison (a shamefully low duration to begin with) and then do it again (possibly one the attacker role this time). In a way death penalty exists, but is reserved to the victims of previous convicts.