We would like you to classify each of the following sets of argument pairs (discussing Death Penalty)  into either SIMILAR or NOT SIMILAR. A pair of arguments is considered SIMILAR if the arguments are about the same FACET (making the same argument), and is considered NOT SIMILAR if they do not have the same FACET. A FACET is a low level issue that often reoccurs in many arguments in support of the author's stance or in attacking the other author's position.

[Q]: Sent1: As far as someone killing while in prison, or escaping and killing innocents, I have addressed this too, and have stated that this is part of the reason I support the death penalty.
 Sent2: Oh, and by the way, the criteria that I mentioned earlier was enough to kill someone for treason, so why shouldn't it be enough to kill someone for another crime?
[A]: Not similar


[Q]: Sent1: If we continue to allow the death penalty, we are no better than the murderers and rapists that we punish with the death penalty.
 Sent2: If we fail to execute murderers, and doing so would in fact have deterred other murders, we have allowed the killing of a bunch of innocent victims.
[A]: Not similar


[Q]: Sent1: The death penalty right now is to easy even I think.
 Sent2: I don't believe the death penalty should be allowed for circumstantial evidenc.
[A]:
Not similar