Reply #20: Like I said, you can't draw any inference from those numbers

[Autonomy]

whatsoever. There's no "logical" (used obligingly) difference between your 'no positive correlation' POV and my 'no negative correlation' POV. It's exactly the same thing. You cannot tell from the information given whether there is a deterence effect, pro OR con.

Your argument was fallacious and disingenuous. Perhaps a better argument could prove your point without being so easily disproved. It is additionally disingenuous to suggest that I was addressing anything other than the manner in which you chose to make your point.

"Since you seem to enjoy logic, can you help me identify which logical fallacy underlies your implication that the absence (if any) of examples of wealthy Northeastern white women violently murdering poor black or hispanic men would somehow disprove the strong correlation between the death penalty and region, race, economic class, and gender?"

You are pointing to an "anecdotal fallacy", but I am not using such a fallacy. The anecdotal fallacy suggests that the existence of a single example proves a trend. What I am asking for is a single example to prove the existence of a category. That's the difference between "There are no blue bananas" and "blue bananas taste bad". I say show me a blue banana before I address whether they taste bad.