Killed Anything Today?

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Sir-Sister-of-Suck
Posts: 940
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 4:09 am

Re: Killed Anything Today?

Post by Sir-Sister-of-Suck »

I should have used a more specific word to differentiate what I meant by a 'death sentence' and actually carrying out a 'death sentence', however the word 'execution' somehow was lost for me, but since you understand what I was trying to say I think we can move on.
thedoc
Posts: 6473
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 4:18 pm

Re: Killed Anything Today?

Post by thedoc »

I once got into a discussion with another person when I said that killing isn't always bad, and the other person automatically assumed that I meant murder and argued that murder is always bad. But I didn't say murder I said killing but I didn't get a chance to ask the other person what they had for their meal that evening. Every time you eat something it involves killing something. You are making the same error by conflating the "death sentence" with the "execution", usually there is a long drawn out process where the convicted person has time to prove their innocence, I will admit that a few do not have the resources to do that.
User avatar
Sir-Sister-of-Suck
Posts: 940
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 4:09 am

Re: Killed Anything Today?

Post by Sir-Sister-of-Suck »

thedoc wrote: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:07 pm I once got into a discussion with another person when I said that killing isn't always bad, and the other person automatically assumed that I meant murder and argued that murder is always bad. But I didn't say murder I said killing but I didn't get a chance to ask the other person what they had for their meal that evening. Every time you eat something it involves killing something. You are making the same error by conflating the "death sentence" with the "execution", usually there is a long drawn out process where the convicted person has time to prove their innocence, I will admit that a few do not have the resources to do that.
I'm considering the process, I just think there's a question to the sanity of the very system made to punish those that kill innocent individuals, with death, when that same system often kills innocent individuals in the process of doing that. This idea that someone can't be given another chance to society, isn't applied to the same rule that enforces it.

I think I'm looking at it in terms of a principle, while you're looking at the effectiveness and efficiency if we already assume that it's justified, since 4.0% innocence/1.6% exoneration rate is a low enough number for you. I think if the legal justice system falsely executed even 1 person, that may be enough for us to re-consider the policy given the idea behind it. Giving the death sentence, the death sentence.
thedoc
Posts: 6473
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 4:18 pm

Re: Killed Anything Today?

Post by thedoc »

Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:52 pm
thedoc wrote: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:07 pm I once got into a discussion with another person when I said that killing isn't always bad, and the other person automatically assumed that I meant murder and argued that murder is always bad. But I didn't say murder I said killing but I didn't get a chance to ask the other person what they had for their meal that evening. Every time you eat something it involves killing something. You are making the same error by conflating the "death sentence" with the "execution", usually there is a long drawn out process where the convicted person has time to prove their innocence, I will admit that a few do not have the resources to do that.
I'm considering the process, I just think there's a question to the sanity of the very system made to punish those that kill innocent individuals, with death, when that same system often kills innocent individuals in the process of doing that. This idea that someone can't be given another chance to society, isn't applied to the same rule that enforces it.

I think I'm looking at it in terms of a principle, while you're looking at the effectiveness and efficiency if we already assume that it's justified, since 4.0% innocence/1.6% exoneration rate is a low enough number for you. I think if the legal justice system falsely executed even 1 person, that may be enough for us to re-consider the policy given the idea behind it. Giving the death sentence, the death sentence.
I agree the system isn't perfect, after all it is administered by fallible human beings. It seems to me that there are two alternatives to release the criminal and hope for the best, which I don't believe is realistic. Or to change the sentence to life in prison, which is going to be expensive, what really gets me is someone else telling me that I should be paying the bill.
User avatar
Sir-Sister-of-Suck
Posts: 940
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 4:09 am

Re: Killed Anything Today?

Post by Sir-Sister-of-Suck »

thedoc wrote: Sun Aug 13, 2017 8:30 pm
Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:52 pm
thedoc wrote: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:07 pm I once got into a discussion with another person when I said that killing isn't always bad, and the other person automatically assumed that I meant murder and argued that murder is always bad. But I didn't say murder I said killing but I didn't get a chance to ask the other person what they had for their meal that evening. Every time you eat something it involves killing something. You are making the same error by conflating the "death sentence" with the "execution", usually there is a long drawn out process where the convicted person has time to prove their innocence, I will admit that a few do not have the resources to do that.
I'm considering the process, I just think there's a question to the sanity of the very system made to punish those that kill innocent individuals, with death, when that same system often kills innocent individuals in the process of doing that. This idea that someone can't be given another chance to society, isn't applied to the same rule that enforces it.

I think I'm looking at it in terms of a principle, while you're looking at the effectiveness and efficiency if we already assume that it's justified, since 4.0% innocence/1.6% exoneration rate is a low enough number for you. I think if the legal justice system falsely executed even 1 person, that may be enough for us to re-consider the policy given the idea behind it. Giving the death sentence, the death sentence.
I agree the system isn't perfect, after all it is administered by fallible human beings. It seems to me that there are two alternatives to release the criminal and hope for the best, which I don't believe is realistic. Or to change the sentence to life in prison, which is going to be expensive, what really gets me is someone else telling me that I should be paying the bill.
I've consistently heard that individuals on death row cost more money than regular prisoners; Just from a quick google search, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, "Cases without the death penalty cost $740,000, while cases where the death penalty is sought cost $1.26 million. Maintaining each death row prisoner costs taxpayers $90,000 more per year than a prisoner in general population" the average inmate costs around $30,000 annually. Granted, this is only a comparison of yearly cost and not overall cost, but the average time someone spends on death row is 15 years, which makes it very comparable, if not, even worse.

Unless you've already delved into the stats yourself before and know some nuance to it that I don't. Even if those stats are wrong, it seems selfish to resort to ending someone's life based on money. I can see those concerns to an extent, but it's not where the very vast majority of your tax money is going.
Belinda
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Killed Anything Today?

Post by Belinda »

The doc wrote:
I agree the system isn't perfect, after all it is administered by fallible human beings. It seems to me that there are two alternatives to release the criminal and hope for the best, which I don't believe is realistic. Or to change the sentence to life in prison, which is going to be expensive, what really gets me is someone else telling me that I should be paying the bill.
Top
You and I should be paying our proportionate shares of the bill, and we should also be apologising to the criminal for imprisoning them instead of making them over into responsible citizens.

True, the criminal may well, if given the choice, opt for death instead of life in prison. This choice I could not permit because the criminal might become a martyr, and because the death penalty is inappropriate for the following reasons , some already argued.

1. It is unreasonable to demonstrate our disapproval of illegal killing by legitimated killing.
2. It is impossible to match a terrible crime with an equal punishment even if that punishment be death , death is often too mild to match the harm that the criminal has done.The harm that the criminal has done is unmatchable.
3.One innocent person's being put to death is sufficient reason not to have the death penalty.
4. Terrible damage is done to me when I avenge myself or others by violence.
Post Reply