Can stage yellow support the death penalty?

[Inliytened1]

21 hours ago, DieFree said:

Assuming in this situation the criminal is guilty without doubt. 

 There are certain people who are lost beyond being found.   They are a danger to society.   If we can afford to keep them locked up then I prefer that over ending their lives.  But ending there lives is nothing more than trying to bring our own human form of justice to somehow appease the victim's family.  Yet most times the victim's family say something along the lines of "I thought this would bring me peace.   I thought this would right the wrong.  I thought this would make me feel whole again. "  it doesn't.   Forgiveness does but this is very hard to do simply because we cannot see oneness.  

Edited September 3, 2022 by Inliytened1

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, zurew said:

This is not true. Based on statistics life time prison is cheaper than death penalty. Death penalty requires a lot of additional work that is highly expensive.

I'm not only pro death penalty, I am pro executing it rapidly. No waiting for 20 years, that is ridiculous and defeats the purpose. There is no good reason why it should take so long and cost so much. Other countries execute it better.

In obvious cases, like when we have video of a shooter, he can be executed immediately after the trial. This endless process of appeals for obvious cases is just silly.

Edited September 3, 2022 by Leo Gura

[zurew]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

that is ridiculous and defeats the purpose

No its not. You need a lot of evidence to prove someone so guilty that you can give them death penalty. If you want to skip stuff your system will be even more prone to error and corruption.

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

In obvious cases, like when we have video of a shooter, he can be executed immediately after the trial.

I think we need to be very careful where we set our bars and standards. A lot of shooters can be treated. Also, video can be manipulated nowadays or totally faked.

 

Edited September 3, 2022 by zurew

[Inliytened1]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I'm not only pro death penalty, I am pro executing it rapidly. No waiting for 20 years, that is ridiculous and defeats the purpose.

Death does nothing.   If you want to do it to free up prison beds fine.  But otherwise it accomplishes zilch.  It doesn't make the families feel whole again.   Nothing can other than forgiveness.  Which is Love. 

Leo think deeper here.

Edited September 3, 2022 by Inliytened1

[Leo Gura]

5 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Death does nothing. 

It saves resources which can be used to improve the lives of people who need it.

This is really a resource allocation issue. Simple as that. There is no point taking care of an asshole for 40 years. If he's gonna be an asshole we don't gotta bend over backwards to take care of him.

Be ware of idiot compassion.

Edited September 3, 2022 by Leo Gura

[Ulax]

I think we should respect the basic dignity of every human being no matter what they do, so I'm personally against the death penalty in all forms.

I'm unsure of whether there is a specific take that a stage yellow person would be predisposed to.

Edit: I just checked my notes, and found, 'There is no absolute Truth, there are only perspectives which have half-truths in them' as a stage yellow mindset. Still unsure what their ethical belief would be. However, I think their systemic mindset would cause them to look at the implications of the death penalty, though am unsure what metric they'd evaluate it by still

Edited September 3, 2022 by Ulax

[zurew]

2 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

This is really a resource allocation issue. Simple as that.

If you ignore innocent people being killed, then yeah its just resources, but again most places where death penalty is used , its more expensive compared to life in prison.

How many people would be sentenced based on your intuition? I don't think a few criminal death worth innocent people being killed. The trade is bad.

[Inliytened1]

3 minutes ago, zurew said:

If you ignore innocent people being killed, then yeah its just resources, but again most places where death penalty is used , its more expensive compared to life in prison.

How many people would be sentenced based on your intuition? I don't think a few criminal death worth innocent people being killed. The trade is bad.

Dude most of the people locked up are guilty.   The falsely accused are far and few between.   Furthermore that's a completely separate discussion. 

Edited September 3, 2022 by Inliytened1

[Inliytened1]

7 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

It saves resources which can be used to improve the lives of people who need it.

This is really a resource allocation issue. Simple as that. There is no point taking care of an asshole for 40 years. If he's gonna be an asshole we don't gotta bend over backwards to take care of him.

Be ware of idiot compassion.

That's not what we are concerned with here.  The question was would yellow back this.  You are sounding extremely narrow minded with this approach.  We are looking at the higher meaning of what  putting someone to death or not is.  

[zurew]

18 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Dude most of the people locked up are guilty.

So do you think trading some human lives for resources is okay or worth it? The whole argument is just weak imo.

Its not a question that innocent people will die, just because death penalty is a possibility. Also, its completely naive to assume that noone in power will use death penalty in any corrupt way.

Also:

Quote

Between 2% and 10% of convicted individuals in US prisons are innocent.

This number will radically go up when it comes to using Leo's justice system, where people are being sentenced left to right to death penalty, without long trials or procedure to prove them guilty or innocent. - The bullet biting here is just too many and too big to take this position.

 

18 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Furthermore that's a completely separate discussion. 

Its not, because if you go with death penalty , then innocent people dying necessarily comes with it, its a bullet you need to bite, if you want to take this position.

Edited September 3, 2022 by zurew

[Inliytened1]

1 minute ago, zurew said:

So do you think trading some human lives for resources is okay or worth it? The whole argument is just weak imo.

Its not a question that innocent people will die, just because death penalty is a possibility. Also, its completely naive to assume that noone in power will use death penalty in any corrupt way.

 

Of course not.  And if Leo had to look at it deeper I'm sure he would agree.   Saving resources is a very red thing.  If it really came down to survival fine- we do what we have to do.  But once beyond that no 

[Hardkill]

27 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

It saves resources which can be used to improve the lives of people who need it.

This is really a resource allocation issue. Simple as that. There is no point taking care of an asshole for 40 years. If he's gonna be an asshole we don't gotta bend over backwards to take care of him.

Be ware of idiot compassion.

But what if someone was wrongly convicted for murder?

Btw, have you seen how humane the Scandinavian prisons are even for murderers? 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l554kV12Wuo

[thepixelmonk]

30 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Dude most of the people locked up are guilty. The falsely accused are far and few between.

Have you actually looked into the statistics? I think false convictions are far more prevalent than you seem to think.

https://thehighcourt.co/wrongful-convictions-statistics/#:~:text=1.,in US prisons are innocent.&text=According to the 2019 annual,between 2% and 10%.

[Leo Gura]

31 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

That's not what we are concerned with here.  The question was would yellow back this.  You are sounding extremely narrow minded with this approach.  We are looking at the higher meaning of what  putting someone to death or not is.  

I gave you my Yellow perspective.

What I'm hearing from you guys is the boilerplate Green perspective.

Compassion has its limits.

Edited September 3, 2022 by Leo Gura

[zurew]

2 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

What I'm hearing from you guys is the boilerplate Green perspective.

Its not green, its the more reasonable perspective. I don't think you actually thought through your position. The bulletbiting there is just way too unreasonable and unnecessary + your goal about resources is not as effective as you think. 

So you basically don't achieve the goal you want to achieve with it + you have to bite that innocent people will die + that people will use it in a corrupt way.

[Inliytened1]

3 minutes ago, zurew said:

Its not green, its the more reasonable perspective. I don't think you actually thought through your position. The bulletbiting there is just way too unreasonable and unnecessary + your goal about resources is not as effective as you think. 

So you basically don't achieve the goal you want to achieve with it + you have to bite that innocent people will die + that people will use it in a corrupt way.

It doesn't matter if they are innocent or not again that's a separate issue.  Let's assume they did it.  What is your view then, if they did it?

[Leo Gura]

8 minutes ago, zurew said:

you have to bite that innocent people will die + that people will use it in a corrupt way.

By your logic no one should ever be imprisoned either. No system is perfect nor immune to corruption.

It's not like imprisoning an innocent person isn't awful.

It's not even clear that imprisoning an innocent person for 30 years is better than a death penalty.

You can easily find cases which are 100% obvious with all the video evidence now available. In the near future most serious crimes will have video evidence. Nobody is being innocently convicted of mass shootings. Get real here.

Edited September 3, 2022 by Leo Gura

[zurew]

1 minute ago, Inliytened1 said:

if they did it?

Did what?

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

By your logic no one should ever be imprisoned either. No system is perfect nor immune to corruption.

Nope, thats not my logic, that would be an absolutist logic. People being wrongly imprisoned is vastly different than people being wrongly killed, I don't even know how you want to establish that comparison there.

 "No system is perfect nor immunte to corruption" thats exactly a point that you need to consider before you make a strong take. Making death penalty avalaible is a disaster in a corrupt system.

[Leo Gura]

2 minutes ago, zurew said:

is a disaster in a corrupt system.

The American court system is not corrupt. It's pretty solid. About as solid as it gets. If anything it's too lenient with endless appeals.

You are framing it as if Biden or Trump are just gonna hand out death penalties to people they dislike.

Serious criminal trials in America are not corrupt.

Edited September 3, 2022 by Leo Gura

[Inliytened1]

2 minutes ago, zurew said:

Did what?

 

If they are guilty. Let's say the guy raped and murdered your daughter and you saw him do it.  He was arrested and charged.   Are you in favor of putting him to death then?