But you weren't arguing that punishing criminals was a long term bad, or even insufficiently good. You were arguing that it was short term suck.

Yes? Punishing criminals sucks, but it pays for the rule of law. I miss your point.

Invert the order of the sentences, and you have your answer. But I will answer at length:

still don't get it

The source of order is deterrence;

agree

deterrence rests on expectations;

agree

expectations rest on identities. The brute is resisted in a way that the even-handed is not; the infirm are flaunted in a way that the firm are not.

wat? I don't understand. What has identity got to do with anything? And too many loaded words. What does "even-handed" even mean, apart from "vaguely good and something to do with justice"?

Accepting any excuse reduces the credibility of the commitment. Sometimes you may think that reduction is acceptable, but you should never pretend it was absent.

Agreed. I thought you meant there weren't cases that were worth it.