White supremacist executed for Texas dragging

[Cort Haus]

Which empirical reasons, gribb?

[Cort Haus]

Also, it's not like Europeans care about innocent life. Look at how many millions they've murdered in wars. And Canada was eager to participate. I don't see any reason to emulate them.

Either a lame troll or as retarded as one of Al's less enlightened posts.

[Hauldren Collider]

If the death penalty doesn't save more innocent lives than it takes in the form of false positives, it isn't worth practicing.

[Asher]

I wouldn't mind having Japanese CEOs over here.

Interestingly, Japanese companies are increasingly hiring Western CEOs because of cultural reasons. Japanese CEOs are reluctant to downsize when necessary, are overly conservative, etc.

[Kidlicious]

If the death penalty doesn't save more innocent lives than it takes in the form of false positives, it isn't worth practicing.

Do you execute innocent peopl to save lives?

[Asher]

Also, it's not like Europeans care about innocent life. Look at how many millions they've murdered in wars. And Canada was eager to participate. I don't see any reason to emulate them.

Canada is one of the world's preeminent defenders of freedom. Historically we've always come to the aid of nations being attacked by Nazi aggressors. The US was a reluctant participant when wars actually matter. And these days the US is more about randomly creating wars to fulfill the combined needs of the military industrial complex and dick-waving politics.

[Asher]

If the death penalty doesn't save more innocent lives than it takes in the form of false positives, it isn't worth practicing.

What is your stance exactly?

I'm not convinced the death penalty deters anything. The states with the death penalty seem to have extremely high murder rates.

[Elok]

What have you got against double penetration?

If there's more than one penis, it's gay. Especially if they're rubbing together. The presence of a woman is irrelevant.

[Hauldren Collider]

What is your stance exactly?

I'm not convinced the death penalty deters anything. The states with the death penalty seem to have extremely high murder rates.

Do you understand the difference between correlation and causation? You need to provide evidence that without the death penalty, their murder rates would be lower to prove your point, something you cannot do by pointing out that many states without the death penalty have low crime.

My stance is that I support the death penalty as long as it is an effective tool at reducing crime and innocent deaths. I am okay with innocent people being put to death accidentally so long as at the end of the day we have saved more lives through prevented murder. It's not clear that this is the case, however, so my stance on the death penalty is undecided at the moment. However, I have no moral opposition to it whatsoever and I think it's ludicrous to claim that it's unconstitutional.

[MikeH]

But there is plenty of evidence from places that have removed the death penalty that the murder rates didn't go up, that implies that the death penalty wasn't keeping murder rates down.

There is a counter argument that once someone has murdered someone, in a death penalty state, they are more motivated to kill witnesses etc to cover up.

I'm not convinced by that one either.

[Elok]

...and there's no distinction between innocents killed by third parties and innocents killed directly by the government?

XPost

[Hauldren Collider]

...and there's no distinction between innocents killed by third parties and innocents killed directly by the government?

XPost

Of course not. Let's say you have a hostage crisis. The SWAT team comes in and kills the hostage-takers and 4 innocent people were killed in the crossfire by bullets from the SWAT team. Had nothing been done, the hostage-takers would have killed all 10 hostages. Clearly, sending in the SWAT team was the right move. More people were saved, even though they were killed by the people trying to protect them.

This is logically equivalent to saying that we will put to death murderers to prevent murders from taking place, but we recognize that any punishment is flawed and innocents will be wrongly convicted since no system is perfect.

[MikeH]

It's wrong whether they are guilty or not.

[Hauldren Collider]

It's wrong whether they are guilty or not.

Well, I think it's wrong to pass up on an opportunity to save innocent life.

[MikeH]

Of course not. Let's say you have a hostage crisis. The SWAT team comes in and kills the hostage-takers and 4 innocent people were killed in the crossfire by bullets from the SWAT team. Had nothing been done, the hostage-takers would have killed all 10 hostages. Clearly, sending in the SWAT team was the right move. More people were saved, even though they were killed by the people trying to protect them.

If the SWAT team had not gone in the hostage takers might have killed all the hostages, or eventually they might have been talked out. We don't know if it was the right move, we don't know what would have happened if they hadn't gone in.

Certainly in that situation, people would lose jobs, there'd be a massive public outcry, it would be an international scandal etc.