Of course that happens. When did I say or suggest it didn't? Are you suggesting killing everybody arrested with mob contacts to make prisons safer?
The majority support policies which promote, encourage, incite, violence and authoritarianism. Absolutely. Just look at how we deal with healthcare and the homeless. No logic applied to any of it because of our personal feelings that people should be punished for not having what we do.
But if you’re afraid of killing them because “there might be a mistake”, wouldn’t you be afraid or against solitary confinement since that same guy might be in there by mistake? Killing an innocent person may very well be a better solution for him than sticking him in solitary. For me it would.
Says you. How about a different logic instead of no logic? Clearly a 100 million plus disagree with you….it would be great if we could discuss without trying to minimize another's logic on a topic that clearly has many, many, people on each side. Your logic is based on a potential. I believe mine is based on a principle. Neither are wrong per say. But if you are to try to sway me into your thinking, maybe stop with making it as though anyone, me, who thinks differently than you is illogical? Or uncaring or caring less than you? Can we not just discuss without making it as though one is not thinking? It would be more productive.
And just to add @Phatguysrule my fellow blazer community friend, whoever said this world is, has ever been, or ever will be logical?
An innocent person isn't likely going to display traits that would get them put in solitary confinement. I'm ok with letting the prison shrink make that decision. You can come back from solitary confinement. You can't come back from death.
My logic is based on numbers and facts, as well as principles. We know we have innocent people in death row. We know we have executed innocent people. We have exonerated people from the death sentence. We should not kill people unless they are a threat to society. People in prison are not a threat to society. We should not have a policy that supports killing prisoners. This seems very simple to me. I'm not minimizing anything, but calling it like it is. Killing a person who is locked up is wrong. Even if it does save us money or space.
We should strive for logical policies. We can control our policies, even if we can't control every eventuality.
numbers aren't always logical. You want us to be robots. That isn't reality. Feelings and emotions come into play in all tragic situations. We are humans. Well most of us anyhow.. (lookin at you dawg)
Believing that a majority of civilians would agree with you, isn't evidence that they truly do. An article with stats on this statement would help your argument though. (just my two cents) The concept that evil must be destroyed, is in and of itself, ironically evil. If you can kill evil, then the act of doing the same act the evil you are destroying did, makes you just as evil as the evil you destroyed. (again, just my two cents)
I dunno. I would think sitting in prison for a crime you didn’t commit for life just might drive you to do things you never thought possible. And go insane. Or violent.
I am very much an advocate of violence creates violence creates violence, etc. . But then i also believe that there is a line. Where that line is drawn is often the foundation of controversy. Let me ask you this. If an individual had a bomb strapped to him that could destroy the planet(play hypothetical with me), would you consider it evil if a sniper took him out before he could detonate such a device? If not, then you too have lines. Its all a matter of perspective of where that line lies.
Hundreds have come back from that situation and survived to live out their lives. I think they should be paid 10x the average salary for every year they spend in there as an apology. We haven't had one come back from death yet. At least, not that I've heard of.
Excellent post. I think parents are in a tough spot. Parents have less disposable income and less support from schools. They are being forced to spend more time just putting food on the table. And with social media, it's just been a perfect storm.
That would be self defense, or defending against a present danger. Completely different situation than executing a person who only gets to see the open sky when a high school dropout decides to let them out of their cage.
I dont understand that last sentence about a high school drop out. The point being is some people believe or feel that an undisputed mass murderer should not be allowed to live. Whether you agree with that or not is your right, but it is also the right of others to think and feel differently than you and it doesn't make them wrong any more than you believe you are right.
You can be a high school dropout and become a prison guard. And fully control the life of these people in prison. Because they are not a threat to society. Yes, I'm only stating my opinion. We should not be convicting anybody unless they are undisputed criminals. Yet we do. Our judicial system isn't capable enough to be sure. That's why we have innocent people on death row. I am opposed to killing innocent people. We should do what ever possible to prevent our government from doing this. Up to to and including not killing people we have in cages. These are my opinions and stances. I've given reasons why, I've shown evidence that we have innocent people in prison and on death row. Evidence that we've exonerated hundreds of people from death row. Which is evidence that there are innocent people in death row now. There was a time when I supported the death penalty. But after much research and deliberation I have changed my stance. Because that is what all the evidence I've been able to find supports. This is why I support logic and data based government. There has never been a government who didn't convict innocent people. If you support the death penalty, you do support the government killing of innocent people. That is the reality of it. I do not support a policy of government vengeance against civilians because there is no logical reason to do so. Nothing gained. No benefit to society. This policy will always result in innocent people who are no threat, and aren't even involved in a threatening situation, being killed by the government. And we are telling our government that killing innocent civilians is acceptable. We can stop that tomorrow, by simply removing the death penalty (which offers no benefit to society), and removing it offers no added cost. I am for doing that. I don't know why some of you are upset about that.
No one is upset that I have read. Instead it seems you are upset that others don't have the same logical mindset as you. There is nothing absolute, which it seems you want and that isn't reality. Flip the coin then. By this logic we shouldn't arrest anyone because when we do, we arent 100% accurate that they did anything wrong. The evidence may support your logic but it doesn't mean your logic is correct. Im willing to bet i can find a higher percentage of guilty people who got off than innocent people who are convicted. There are victims on both sides. But what is the percent? Less than 1% of convicted are convicted while being innocent? There is no answer to make things perfect. But the numbers say keep arresting criminals because the percent of guilty removed from the streets is a greater threat removal with a higher chance of having more victims, than the few who are wrongly incarcerated. Yes some things in all facets of life, slip through the cracks. Unfortunately this is the worst side of it. But when dealing in the hundreds of millions, we are all just stats. i bet the stats say its better for society to get convicts off the streets even at the risk of a rare innocent being convicted, than to let them run free. I know this isn't what you said, but I'm just giving an example that at times no stat is perfect, but you go with the one that helps society more. Many, many people see removing an undisputed mass murderer from this earth as helping society. Not just physically but mentally…emotionally. Logic will not overrule this feeling. We are human. We are not mathematical robots.
Can you please show me the exclamation points and all caps that I've used to address anybody in this thread? You, as well as others have addressed me with such regarding this discussion. Do I really need to go back and quote them? I have only stated my position, and backed it up with data and facts. Yes. We can absolutely remove the policy that allows our government to kill innocent people. I have already established this. This is reality. I have already addressed this several times. We have exonerated many people. And I fully support paying anybody who is exonerated the greater of 10x the the wage they would have earned otherwise, or 10x the average salary during the time they were incarcerated. This is not a mistake that we should allow the government to make lightly. Wow. This is an incredibly low bar. So, it's ok to kill an innocent person as long as we get a guilty person as well? Yep, I disagree with this 100%. I would much prefer 100 guilty people go free than punish 1 innocent person. No, the numbers say arresting people doesn't help much. We're among the most violent countries in the world with the largest prison population in the world. If arresting people worked we would be the least violent country in the world. You would be wrong (if you're suggesting this remains at current levels), as stated above. Stats have given us answers here, we have refused to apply those stats to logical solutions which have been proven to address our problems.
when you minimize another's logic, it is a sign you are upset another doesn't think the same as you. Caps doesn't always mean someone is upset. It can just mean emphasis on a word. I can type I am NOT upset. Emphasizing the not. That doesn't mean i am upset. It just means im trying to be clear that I am NOT upset. Yes you should go back and quote them, if you deem them being upset at you. I bet there are reasons you may not be logically thinking about as to why something was typing in caps.
