Is evildragon who we think he is ;)


in related news, i live like 5min away from where the Mormon religion was born, i dont blame it for me being a kook
 
Saber said:
[There exist really bad people. I knew.]

Yes, I agree if 4.1% of the people executed are found innocent later on then 4.1% is too much and the system should be overhauled to bring this figure to nil, but I also believe it isn’t worth keeping nightmares of the kind described above around when the price is more victims, which are far more precious than any ancillary(over incarceration) costs associated with indefinitely removing those who would harm them from this world.
Click to expand...
So you are okay with /some/ innocent killed.If you want to bring down innocent executions it will cost even more than now unless you have some revolutionary new legal system to propose and fight for politically (I'm all ears).

And as humans are fallible there /always/ /will/ be some innocent executions anyway, no matter how much you spend.

And as money is limited, this also means you are taking that money away from other areas such as actually catching the criminals or preventing crime. If they had more money they could save more victims before they become victims and could catch more criminals after their crime. So the cost of death penalty shouldn't be expressed in dollars, but in additional crimes committed and murderers uncaught.

Furthermore, your argument "price [for non-death-penalty] is more victims" is nil. The alternative to killing those criminals is incarcerating them for life, i.e. they won't ever get a chance to commit another serious crime. Respectively they'll have a very very slim chance of escaping and committing more crimes, but this chance is so small it's irrelevant compared to the numbers of innocents executed (the life of a human executed innocent isn't less important than the life of a potential victim, is it?).
 
A good way to prevent murder is a good social securityyx network. Murders per 100K population.

USA: 4.7; Social Qoute: around 15%

Germany: 0.8; Social Qoute: 28%

Sweden: 0.7; Social qoute: around 33%

Social Qoute:

Social Spending / GDP

Germany spends over 28% of its GDP for social secuirty. Sweden has very nice prisons of for Breivik, the children mass murder. He complains he get cold coffee and has just a playstation 2 and not a playstation 2. And isn't allowed to play egoshooters,since he said he used them to become "hardened" to kill the kids. If this are the worst complaints about your prison system you are doing it right.

So give more money to the poor, so they wont kill you for money to afford a flat, healt care or food (you get food stamps only after 6 weeks of living in a city afaik) and you will have less murders.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
rohezal said:
A good way to prevent murder is a good social securityyx network. Murders per 100K population. USA: 4.7; Social Qoute: around 15% Germany: 0.8; Social Qoute: 28% Sweden: 0.7; Social qoute: around 33% Social Qoute: Social Spending / GDP
Click to expand...
Correlation != Causation

Although in this case the is a plausible logical link
 
Crime tends to be proportional to inequality. Most inequality is caused by legalized crimes. Theft and murder are only illegal if you do it on a small scale; it's completely legal and even tax-funded when the rich do it on a large scale (they euphemistically call it "supporting entrepreneurship" and "peace-keeping").
 
bosbeetle said:
hmmm this got moved to the forgettable realms of the offtopic section.
Click to expand...
Well not too surprising due to the off-topic nature of the the post and how this thread went off on a tangent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top