No More Death Penalty in New Mexico

[KrazyHorse]

DaShi's argument appears to be that capital punishment is a bad idea, so long as human life is worthless.

[SlowwHand]

See, DaShi? KH is a jerkoff.

[DaShi]

If we value a human life at 1 million dollars (extremely low; lawsuits value lives at 2-3 million, while safety regulations value lives at 6 million or so) then we merely have to believe that there is a 20% chance that deterrence exists and is of the scale that the pro-deterrence study found in order to make out in expected value.

In actuality, we have no real basis for knowing whether OR NOT we can cause significant deterrence by applying the death penalty. And in the face of such ignorance we cannot make a logical decision for whether or not to apply it without appealing to our Bayesian priors (i.e. prejudices).

By the way, if we use more realistic numbers for the cost of capital trials/appeals and human life then all we require is a 2% chance that the pro-deterrence study is correct in order to justify capital punishment.

So in terms of expected value, your statement that ceasing to execute murderers is the logical thing to do is exactly equivalent to stating that you're 98% sure that a study which is academically on par with any on the subject is completely wrong.

Very logical indeed.

Here I was writing out this long detailed response, when it is so simple. I probably should have read your entire post to begin with. You hypothetical requires that there is at least a 2% chance that deterrence exists. That is what you must prove, in order to begin making your case for it. The rest of your stuff about cost is unnecessary until then. And since, you State with, "we have no real basis for knowing whether OR NOT we can cause significant deterrence by applying the death penalty," I don't think that you can. Therefore, it is illogical to continue to use capital punishment, unless you are willing to forget about its current costs (which your argument above seems to). To do otherwise, would indeed be based on personal predujice and perceived benefit. But there would be no logical basis for it.

Yes, but the benefit from keeping it politically relevant is that it encourages further study, and we may be able to push those uncertainties in one direction or the other and make a more informed decision at some point in the future. A complete ban in the US would effectively stop the debate in the Western world, and would stop us from getting any more data.

This is probably the single most unethical study since Tuskegee.

[DaShi]

Oh and, ****.

[KrazyHorse]

That is what you must prove

I don't have to prove anything, you twit.

I can just as easily say that you must prove the converse.



The point is that currently no reasonable proof of either statement exists. Though I think that hearing your arguments for why you're so bloody certain that one is true rather than the other would be interesting.

[KrazyHorse]

And since, you State with, "we have no real basis for knowing whether OR NOT we can cause significant deterrence by applying the death penalty," I don't think that you can. Therefore, it is illogical to continue to use capital punishment, unless you are willing to forget about its current costs

This statement makes absolutely no sense.

[KrazyHorse]

I'm beginning to see why Kuci has you on ignore.

[DaShi]

Yes, but without it. All your fancy equations are worthless. Anyway, I can see where this is going now (I've been through enough of these), so lalala. I'm done. Have it your way, since that's the only way this will end now.

[DaShi]

And since, you State with, "we have no real basis for knowing whether OR NOT we can cause significant deterrence by applying the death penalty," I don't think that you can. Therefore, it is illogical to continue to use capital punishment, unless you are willing to forget about its current costs

This statement makes absolutely no sense.

Yes, this appears to be the problem. Let's just say that my argument has been consistent throughout.

[DaShi]

I'm beginning to see why Kuci has you on ignore.

Fairl enough. I probably shouldn't have been so blithe about your equation to begin with. The "**** " was just a comment on your "****" remarks and not a direct insult toward you. I'll keep in mind your sensitivities in the future.

[KrazyHorse]

There is some evidence that the death penalty causes deterrence and some evidence that it does not. For those of us who are not retards, this leads to some assignment of non-trivial probabilities as to whether or not the deterrent effect is real and what its scale is. With this incomplete information, I can choose to apply an expected value calculation to two courses of action. For a large range of priors as to the effectiveness of DP deterrence the choice for the DP is justifiable. The higher I value a human life, the MORE likely it is that the DP is justifiable, as the direct monetary costs are independent of the effectiveness.

So, DaShi, what is YOUR estimation of the probability that an execution deters > 10 murders as a statistical average? Followup: where did you get your number from?

[KrazyHorse]

Yes, but without it. All your fancy equations are worthless. Anyway, I can see where this is going now (I've been through enough of these), so lalala. I'm done. Have it your way, since that's the only way this will end now.

In other words, you're an idiot who thinks that this is some sort of court case where the burden of evidence has been placed on me.

[DaShi]

No, I meant you in the general sense. Not really, you specifically. I should have made that more clear. Although, I wouldn't be surprised, if you could find the data to significantly support capital punishment. I believe that you are very capable of such a feat.

[KrazyHorse]

Fairl enough. I probably shouldn't have been so blithe about your equation to begin with. The "**** " was just a comment on your "****" remarks and not a direct insult toward you. I'll keep in mind your sensitivities in the future.

If you think I'm sensitive about you calling me a **** then you've vastly misunderstood me.

I'm annoyed with you because you're demonstrating a complete unwillingness to actually think about this issue at any depth whatsoever. Instead, you've chosen to rely on the arguments that:

1) Human life is priceless, therefore valueless
2) Your position, based on 0 evidence, is correct, therefore all others need to prove you wrong beyond a reasonable doubt

In actuality, one would think that given a number of high-quality studies with differing estimates of deterrence, unless you have specific knowledge as to how one or more may be flawed, a reasonable person would weight them at least somewhat equally. Not lend 10 times more credence to one than the other simply because it reinforced his previous beliefs.

There is a reasonable criminological case for the death penalty from a deterrence point of view. It is not overwhelming. In the absence of perfect evidence we have to base our actions on the sometimes incomplete and contradictory evidence we do have. It is NOT overwhelmingly obvious either that states should begin executing people ASAP nor that they should ban executions. I'm willing to sit back and wait for more evidence.

[DaShi]

There is some evidence that the death penalty causes deterrence and some evidence that it does not. For those of us who are not retards, this leads to some assignment of non-trivial probabilities as to whether or not the deterrent effect is real and what its scale is.

And what are those probabilities in light of the controversy?

[quote]With this incomplete information, I can choose to apply an expected value calculation to two courses of action. For a large range of priors as to the effectiveness of DP deterrence the choice for the DP is justifiable. The higher I value a human life, the MORE likely it is that the DP is justifiable, as the direct monetary costs are independent of the effectiveness.[/q]

Yes, you can do many such things. However, if there not yet exists a significant probability of deterence, then it doesn't matter. Also, I would add that you may need to consider the cost of wrongly accused.

So, DaShi, what is YOUR estimation of the probability that an execution deters > 10 murders as a statistical average? Followup: where did you get your number from?

My estimation would be irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Thank you for allowing me to say this in this manner.