Meanwhile, on Long Island...
-
-
I think throwing acid on someone is a particularly heinous act.
I view the death penalty favorably, for various reasons. But I believe it should be administered swiftly and without undue suffering.
In the case of acid attack, however, the penalty should be death by radiation poisoning. Not enough to kill them in a few days, but certainly enough to eliminate a person in less than a year.
-
About 1 out of 25 folks on death row or who died already were innocent.
Being okay with those stats has some interesting connotations.
-
Where does that stat come from? Not that I have any doubt that many innocents have been killed.
@mik said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
Where does that stat come from? Not that I have any doubt that many innocents have been killed.
The Innocence Project. Another fun one: 5% of confessions come from people who later turn out to have had nothing to do with the crime. Not that there's lacking evidence—that hard evidence completely exonerates them, despite their full confessions. Confessions sometimes aren't what people think they are.
I'm not anti-death penalty because I'm touchy-feely about people or think everyone's a good person. It's because our justice system is nowhere near accurate enough to justify taking a life. It's one of those things that gets more absurd the more you learn.
Please love yourself.
-
@mik said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
Where does that stat come from? Not that I have any doubt that many innocents have been killed.
The Innocence Project. Another fun one: 5% of confessions come from people who later turn out to have had nothing to do with the crime. Not that there's lacking evidence—that hard evidence completely exonerates them, despite their full confessions. Confessions sometimes aren't what people think they are.
I'm not anti-death penalty because I'm touchy-feely about people or think everyone's a good person. It's because our justice system is nowhere near accurate enough to justify taking a life. It's one of those things that gets more absurd the more you learn.
@aqua-letifer said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
@mik said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
Where does that stat come from? Not that I have any doubt that many innocents have been killed.
The Innocence Project. Another fun one: 5% of confessions come from people who later turn out to have had nothing to do with the crime. Not that there's lacking evidence—that hard evidence completely exonerates them, despite their full confessions. Confessions sometimes aren't what people think they are.
I'm not anti-death penalty because I'm touchy-feely about people or think everyone's a good person. It's because our justice system is nowhere near accurate enough to justify taking a life. It's one of those things that gets more absurd the more you learn.
That's pretty much where I am. You can let someone out if proven innocent. You cannot resurrect them. But cases like the one in this thread give me pause.
-
@aqua-letifer said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
@mik said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
Where does that stat come from? Not that I have any doubt that many innocents have been killed.
The Innocence Project. Another fun one: 5% of confessions come from people who later turn out to have had nothing to do with the crime. Not that there's lacking evidence—that hard evidence completely exonerates them, despite their full confessions. Confessions sometimes aren't what people think they are.
I'm not anti-death penalty because I'm touchy-feely about people or think everyone's a good person. It's because our justice system is nowhere near accurate enough to justify taking a life. It's one of those things that gets more absurd the more you learn.
That's pretty much where I am. You can let someone out if proven innocent. You cannot resurrect them. But cases like the one in this thread give me pause.
@mik said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
That's pretty much where I am. You can let someone out if proven innocent. You cannot resurrect them. But cases like the one in this thread give me pause.
Yeah, I get that. But allowing the death penalty necessarily means that you're not going to get it right all the time. Killing this attacker, assuming we get this one right, necessarily means killing innocents along the way under the same process. So you have to ask yourself if killing innocents is worth the opportunity to kill the scum of the earth.
For me it's not even close.
Please love yourself.
-
@mik said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
That's pretty much where I am. You can let someone out if proven innocent. You cannot resurrect them. But cases like the one in this thread give me pause.
Yeah, I get that. But allowing the death penalty necessarily means that you're not going to get it right all the time. Killing this attacker, assuming we get this one right, necessarily means killing innocents along the way under the same process. So you have to ask yourself if killing innocents is worth the opportunity to kill the scum of the earth.
For me it's not even close.
@aqua-letifer said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
@mik said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
That's pretty much where I am. You can let someone out if proven innocent. You cannot resurrect them. But cases like the one in this thread give me pause.
Yeah, I get that. But allowing the death penalty necessarily means that you're not going to get it right all the time. Killing this attacker, assuming we get this one right, necessarily means killing innocents along the way under the same process. So you have to ask yourself if killing innocents is worth the opportunity to kill the scum of the earth.
For me it's not even close.
That goes both ways
There are innocents both ways
Which innocent gets priority?
The innocent who is convicted of murder, or the innocent that has never done anything wrong?
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-16638227
Over 30 killers killed again after being freed from prison between 2000/1 and 2010/11, statistics show.
Figures released by the Home Office show 29 people with homicide convictions went on to commit murder and six went on to commit manslaughter.
Of those 29 murderers, 13 previously committed murder and 16 manslaughter.
The government says it does all it can to protect the public from offenders "but sadly risk can never be eliminated entirely".
-
People die in prison after being sentenced to life without parole. Presumably the same proportion of those are innocent as the ones on death row. The death row ones get way more attention and if they're actually innocent death row is probably their best bet. Granted, that's not the intention of death row, but it is the current effect. We've emasculated the death penalty process to the extent that if you are innocent, death row helps you get the attention your case needs.
One thing that always struck me as odd is that after the success of Serial, there was a feeding frenzy for stories of innocent people in jail. But how many were actually found? Serial didn't find one. Making a Murderer didn't find one. I think the Innocence Project numbers are dubious.
-
People die in prison after being sentenced to life without parole. Presumably the same proportion of those are innocent as the ones on death row. The death row ones get way more attention and if they're actually innocent death row is probably their best bet. Granted, that's not the intention of death row, but it is the current effect. We've emasculated the death penalty process to the extent that if you are innocent, death row helps you get the attention your case needs.
One thing that always struck me as odd is that after the success of Serial, there was a feeding frenzy for stories of innocent people in jail. But how many were actually found? Serial didn't find one. Making a Murderer didn't find one. I think the Innocence Project numbers are dubious.
@horace said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
People die in prison after being sentenced to life without parole. Presumably the same proportion of those are innocent as the ones on death row.
Similar, but false equivalence. They aren't exactly the same and it's not hypocritical to not treat them as such.
One thing that always struck me as odd is that after the success of Serial, there was a feeding frenzy for stories of innocent people in jail. But how many were actually found? Serial didn't find one. Making a Murderer didn't find one.
The justice system is perfect because a couple of podcasts you listen to can't find stories of innocent people going to jail?
I think the Innocence Project numbers are dubious.
That's a claim you'd have to back up with evidence in order for me to take that seriously. Not because I have some kind of soft spot for them, but because research is kind of their thing and you've so far presented none except for your mention of two podcasts you listened to.
-
@horace said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
People die in prison after being sentenced to life without parole. Presumably the same proportion of those are innocent as the ones on death row.
Similar, but false equivalence. They aren't exactly the same and it's not hypocritical to not treat them as such.
One thing that always struck me as odd is that after the success of Serial, there was a feeding frenzy for stories of innocent people in jail. But how many were actually found? Serial didn't find one. Making a Murderer didn't find one.
The justice system is perfect because a couple of podcasts you listen to can't find stories of innocent people going to jail?
I think the Innocence Project numbers are dubious.
That's a claim you'd have to back up with evidence in order for me to take that seriously. Not because I have some kind of soft spot for them, but because research is kind of their thing and you've so far presented none except for your mention of two podcasts you listened to.
@aqua-letifer said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
@horace said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
People die in prison after being sentenced to life without parole. Presumably the same proportion of those are innocent as the ones on death row.
Similar, but false equivalence. They aren't exactly the same and it's not hypocritical to not treat them as such.
One thing that always struck me as odd is that after the success of Serial, there was a feeding frenzy for stories of innocent people in jail. But how many were actually found? Serial didn't find one. Making a Murderer didn't find one.
The justice system is perfect because a couple of podcasts you listen to can't find stories of innocent people going to jail?
I think the Innocence Project numbers are dubious.
That's a claim you'd have to back up with evidence in order for me to take that seriously. Not because I have some kind of soft spot for them, but because research is kind of their thing and you've so far presented none except for your mention of two podcasts you listened to.
I'm not so much talking about those two podcasts, but the feeding frenzy I noticed for similar stories of innocent people being railroaded. That's the narrative, that it happens all the time. Well, apparently 4% of the time according to IP. If that stat holds true, those producers who want to make the next blockbuster documentary or podcast or 20/20 episode sure did miss a lot of potentially juicy stories. I'm talking about the stories I didn't see.
-
@aqua-letifer said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
@horace said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
People die in prison after being sentenced to life without parole. Presumably the same proportion of those are innocent as the ones on death row.
Similar, but false equivalence. They aren't exactly the same and it's not hypocritical to not treat them as such.
One thing that always struck me as odd is that after the success of Serial, there was a feeding frenzy for stories of innocent people in jail. But how many were actually found? Serial didn't find one. Making a Murderer didn't find one.
The justice system is perfect because a couple of podcasts you listen to can't find stories of innocent people going to jail?
I think the Innocence Project numbers are dubious.
That's a claim you'd have to back up with evidence in order for me to take that seriously. Not because I have some kind of soft spot for them, but because research is kind of their thing and you've so far presented none except for your mention of two podcasts you listened to.
I'm not so much talking about those two podcasts, but the feeding frenzy I noticed for similar stories of innocent people being railroaded. That's the narrative, that it happens all the time. Well, apparently 4% of the time according to IP. If that stat holds true, those producers who want to make the next blockbuster documentary or podcast or 20/20 episode sure did miss a lot of potentially juicy stories. I'm talking about the stories I didn't see.
@horace said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
I'm not so much talking about those two podcasts, but the feeding frenzy I noticed for similar stories of innocent people being railroaded. That's the narrative, that it happens all the time. Well, apparently 4% of the time according to IP. If that stat holds true, those producers who want to make the next blockbuster documentary or podcast or 20/20 episode sure did miss a lot of potentially juicy stories. I'm talking about the stories I didn't see.
Fair enough, but to broaden speculation just a bit, not every one of those stories are juicy and interesting. Most wrongful conviction stories are pretty boring, which I think would reasonably explain the lack of coverage. ...That, and the fact that the world Moved On from Serial and other podcasts after Trump was in office. Liberal media had other tyrannies to rail against by that point.
-
@mik said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
That's pretty much where I am. You can let someone out if proven innocent. You cannot resurrect them. But cases like the one in this thread give me pause.
Yeah, I get that. But allowing the death penalty necessarily means that you're not going to get it right all the time. Killing this attacker, assuming we get this one right, necessarily means killing innocents along the way under the same process. So you have to ask yourself if killing innocents is worth the opportunity to kill the scum of the earth.
For me it's not even close.
@aqua-letifer said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
@mik said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
That's pretty much where I am. You can let someone out if proven innocent. You cannot resurrect them. But cases like the one in this thread give me pause.
Yeah, I get that. But allowing the death penalty necessarily means that you're not going to get it right all the time. Killing this attacker, assuming we get this one right, necessarily means killing innocents along the way under the same process. So you have to ask yourself if killing innocents is worth the opportunity to kill the scum of the earth.
For me it's not even close.
I used to be on The Farm at least once a month. Sometimes more.
You really, really don't want to spend a lifetime down there.
According to your stats, we're getting about 4% of death penalty cases wrong. And guessing that they may have bias, it may not be that high. In an imperfect systen, that's not as bad as it sounds.
If you'd like to focus on better funding for the Public Defender, I'm all for it. If you'd even like to tighten up death penalty laws, I'm more than willing to listen. But...There are people in this world that are inherently evil, are guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt and are a cancer that needs to be cut out of the body of humanity.
I'd gave no more problem popping them in the burr of the ear, than I would a slaughter hog in the pen. Of course, the Bible said to hang them, so I may be in error on methodology.
-
@aqua-letifer said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
@mik said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
That's pretty much where I am. You can let someone out if proven innocent. You cannot resurrect them. But cases like the one in this thread give me pause.
Yeah, I get that. But allowing the death penalty necessarily means that you're not going to get it right all the time. Killing this attacker, assuming we get this one right, necessarily means killing innocents along the way under the same process. So you have to ask yourself if killing innocents is worth the opportunity to kill the scum of the earth.
For me it's not even close.
I used to be on The Farm at least once a month. Sometimes more.
You really, really don't want to spend a lifetime down there.
According to your stats, we're getting about 4% of death penalty cases wrong. And guessing that they may have bias, it may not be that high. In an imperfect systen, that's not as bad as it sounds.
If you'd like to focus on better funding for the Public Defender, I'm all for it. If you'd even like to tighten up death penalty laws, I'm more than willing to listen. But...There are people in this world that are inherently evil, are guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt and are a cancer that needs to be cut out of the body of humanity.
I'd gave no more problem popping them in the burr of the ear, than I would a slaughter hog in the pen. Of course, the Bible said to hang them, so I may be in error on methodology.
@jolly said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
I used to be on The Farm at least once a month. Sometimes more.
You really, really don't want to spend a lifetime down there.
I already said my opinion doesn't come from a place of compassion for nihilistic psychopaths.
According to your stats, we're getting about 4% of death penalty cases wrong. And guessing that they may have bias, it may not be that high. In an imperfect systen, that's not as bad as it sounds.
It still boils down to the same problem: it's an imperfect death penalty system. For every X monsters you kill, you're necessarily going to be killing Y innocent people.
There are a number of ways to come to terms with that. You can criticize stats up to the point where you delude yourself into believing that absolutely everyone who was ever given lethal injection deserved it. Or you can delude yourself into thinking that everyone who was ever killed by the state was a bad person anyway, even if they didn't commit that particular crime. Both of these are horseshit, but people are allowed to believe what they want.
What would be a little intellectually honest would be to own up to the fact that you're killing innocent people in the process, and that that's just the cost of doing business. People are free to believe that, too. I also find it a completely horseshit position to take for anyone who claims to be anti-abortion for moral reasons, and not one I have to respect or even take seriously, but that's just me. I really don't care who disagrees with me. Most people do.
Please love yourself.
-
@jolly said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
I used to be on The Farm at least once a month. Sometimes more.
You really, really don't want to spend a lifetime down there.
I already said my opinion doesn't come from a place of compassion for nihilistic psychopaths.
According to your stats, we're getting about 4% of death penalty cases wrong. And guessing that they may have bias, it may not be that high. In an imperfect systen, that's not as bad as it sounds.
It still boils down to the same problem: it's an imperfect death penalty system. For every X monsters you kill, you're necessarily going to be killing Y innocent people.
There are a number of ways to come to terms with that. You can criticize stats up to the point where you delude yourself into believing that absolutely everyone who was ever given lethal injection deserved it. Or you can delude yourself into thinking that everyone who was ever killed by the state was a bad person anyway, even if they didn't commit that particular crime. Both of these are horseshit, but people are allowed to believe what they want.
What would be a little intellectually honest would be to own up to the fact that you're killing innocent people in the process, and that that's just the cost of doing business. People are free to believe that, too. I also find it a completely horseshit position to take for anyone who claims to be anti-abortion for moral reasons, and not one I have to respect or even take seriously, but that's just me. I really don't care who disagrees with me. Most people do.
@aqua-letifer said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
@jolly said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
I used to be on The Farm at least once a month. Sometimes more.
You really, really don't want to spend a lifetime down there.
I already said my opinion doesn't come from a place of compassion for nihilistic psychopaths.
According to your stats, we're getting about 4% of death penalty cases wrong. And guessing that they may have bias, it may not be that high. In an imperfect systen, that's not as bad as it sounds.
It still boils down to the same problem: it's an imperfect death penalty system. For every X monsters you kill, you're necessarily going to be killing Y innocent people.
There are a number of ways to come to terms with that. You can criticize stats up to the point where you delude yourself into believing that absolutely everyone who was ever given lethal injection deserved it. Or you can delude yourself into thinking that everyone who was ever killed by the state was a bad person anyway, even if they didn't commit that particular crime. Both of these are horseshit, but people are allowed to believe what they want.
What would be a little intellectually honest would be to own up to the fact that you're killing innocent people in the process, and that that's just the cost of doing business. People are free to believe that, too. I also find it a completely horseshit position to take for anyone who claims to be anti-abortion for moral reasons, and not one I have to respect or even take seriously, but that's just me. I really don't care who disagrees with me. Most people do.
Yeah, but your kids still love you.
-
@jolly said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
I used to be on The Farm at least once a month. Sometimes more.
You really, really don't want to spend a lifetime down there.
I already said my opinion doesn't come from a place of compassion for nihilistic psychopaths.
According to your stats, we're getting about 4% of death penalty cases wrong. And guessing that they may have bias, it may not be that high. In an imperfect systen, that's not as bad as it sounds.
It still boils down to the same problem: it's an imperfect death penalty system. For every X monsters you kill, you're necessarily going to be killing Y innocent people.
There are a number of ways to come to terms with that. You can criticize stats up to the point where you delude yourself into believing that absolutely everyone who was ever given lethal injection deserved it. Or you can delude yourself into thinking that everyone who was ever killed by the state was a bad person anyway, even if they didn't commit that particular crime. Both of these are horseshit, but people are allowed to believe what they want.
What would be a little intellectually honest would be to own up to the fact that you're killing innocent people in the process, and that that's just the cost of doing business. People are free to believe that, too. I also find it a completely horseshit position to take for anyone who claims to be anti-abortion for moral reasons, and not one I have to respect or even take seriously, but that's just me. I really don't care who disagrees with me. Most people do.
@aqua-letifer said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
For every X monsters you kill, you're necessarily going to be killing Y innocent people.
For every X monsters you release, you're necessarily going to be killing Y innocent people.
Pick your poison.
-
@aqua-letifer said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
For every X monsters you kill, you're necessarily going to be killing Y innocent people.
For every X monsters you release, you're necessarily going to be killing Y innocent people.
Pick your poison.
@copper said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
@aqua-letifer said in Meanwhile, on Long Island...:
For every X monsters you kill, you're necessarily going to be killing Y innocent people.
For every X monsters you release, you're necessarily going to be killing Y innocent people.
Pick your poison.
Depends which poison you believe serves the common good for all as opposed to which poison serves the greater good for the greatest number of people. If state execution serves the common good then losing a few innocents in the process is really nothing more than collateral damage. If on the other hand, state execution serves the greater good, then I guess the loss of a few innocents along the way is nothing more than a justified end result to a means of accomplishing a desired goal.
Which ever poison works best for you. You're probably right either way.
