Dude, this is simply awesome...

[S&Wshooter]

Originally Posted by BurtReynoldsMoustache

What you're not taking into account is law enforcement's overzealousness to obtain a conviction resulting in the imprisonment and execution of an innocent person. This happens alot. Executions should just be done away with, getting to the point of proving that somebody actually deserves to die is expensive and time consuming and results in a very small number of executions. It's not even worth it. Executing certain people may be justifiable, but in practice it's more about revenge than actual justice.

It's less expensive than keeping them alive in prison for the rest of their life

[k9870]

It's less expensive than keeping them alive in prison for the rest of their life

Theoretically, problem is they are on death row 25 years with three appeals, which ends up costing more, if they got one appeal and 8-10 years things would be different.

[S&Wshooter]

Originally Posted by k9870

Theoretically, problem is they are on death row 25 years with three appeals, which ends up costing more, if they got one appeal and 8-10 years things would be different.

That's what I said earlier, dammit

[k9870]

Im agreeing with you, and BTW, didnt ghandi say the jews should commit mass suicide? I know all "civil rights leaders" are put to godly status in our textbooks in school but if you look into their lives they are usually WAY different.

[S&Wshooter]

Originally Posted by k9870

Im agreeing with you, and BTW, didnt ghandi say the jews should commit mass suicide? I know all "civil rights leaders" are put to godly status in our textbooks in school but if you look into their lives they are usually WAY different.

Different in that they were all pretty bad people

[BurtReynoldsMoustache]

Originally Posted by k9870

Im agreeing with you, and BTW, didnt ghandi say the jews should commit mass suicide? I know all "civil rights leaders" are put to godly status in our textbooks in school but if you look into their lives they are usually WAY different.

"My sympathy does not blind me to the requirements of justice. The cry for the national home for the Jews does not make much appeal to me. The sanction for it is sought in the Bible and in the tenacity with which the Jews have hankered after their return to Palestine. Why should they not, like other peoples of the earth, make that country their home where they are born and where they earn their livelihood?"

Gandhi wrote against the creation of a Jewish state in the middle east because he knew the biblical claim used to rationalize it's existence was ridiculous. He was not an antisemite.

"Hitler killed five million Jews. It is the greatest crime of our time. But the Jews should have offered themselves to the butcher’s knife. They should have thrown themselves into the sea from cliffs... It would have aroused the world and the people of Germany... As it is they succumbed anyway in their millions."

What he meant was that with the passiveness they presented in the face of the holocaust, they may as well have killed themselves. He was not calling for Jews or anybody to commit mass suicide because he didn't like them, he simply stated that had they called attention to their own plight (in this case by committing mass suicide) the world could have responded beforehand. This quote came from 1946, nobody outside of Germany (most Germans as well) even knew about the holocaust until after the war was over.

And no, Gandhi did not support Adolf Hitler.

http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/a...dhihitler.html

[BurtReynoldsMoustache]

Originally Posted by k9870

Theoretically, problem is they are on death row 25 years with three appeals, which ends up costing more, if they got one appeal and 8-10 years things would be different.

Yes it is more expensive this way, and it is the only way we can justifiably execute people. If we sped up the process, yes we'd execute alot of people who probably deserve it, but we'd end up executing alot of people who don't.

[k9870]

we'd end up executing alot of people who don't.

As ive said, no we wouldnt, the burden of proof to get the death penalty is so big that it is next to impossible to be wrongfly convicted.

[BurtReynoldsMoustache]

Originally Posted by k9870

As ive said, no we wouldnt, the burden of proof to get the death penalty is so big that it is next to impossible to be wrongfly convicted.

You're missing the point that you either execute a whole bunch of people who might deserve it at a low cost and get a whole bunch of innocent or not-deserving people executed with them, OR you go through the lengthy and expensive due process to make sure you only execute people who absolutely deserve it, thus using up resources and allowing many to slip through the cracks. It's not worth it to go through all that energy, time, and money to execute a few dozen people every year when hundreds more just like them are life sentences at a lower cost to the public.

[S&Wshooter]

Originally Posted by BurtReynoldsMoustache

You're missing the point that you either execute a whole bunch of people who might deserve it at a low cost and get a whole bunch of innocent or not-deserving people executed with them, OR you go through the lengthy and expensive due process to make sure you only execute people who absolutely deserve it, thus using up resources and allowing many to slip through the cracks. It's not worth it to go through all that energy, time, and money to execute a few dozen people every year when hundreds more just like them are life sentences at a lower cost to the public.

Or we could just not have life sentences