Morality

[Violet]

I'd let nine murderers go free if it meant that I didn't have to execute a single innocent man. The thought is unbearable. Justice isn't supposed to be pragmatic, it's supposed to be just. Would be easy to avoid if we didn't feel the need to "kill people back" as if it solved anything.

Law isn't about justice: It's damage control. Whatever it pretends to be so the masses get behind it: this is the goal.

It solves a very difficult problem, infact: preventing them from sabotaging the workings of government, and ensuring that minimal resources are used in doing so.

---

Definitely got to side with Rhythm on that. You can't afford to get this sort of thing wrong. I'm against the death penalty for sure.

Yes, we can afford it... and easily too. We have a solid 10% 'unemployment' in america... that means that 10% of the currently working people can die without causing enough damage to be noticed.

And when the rest start dying: haul in the Mexicans... who are in a hurry to get here as it is

The death penalty is overvalued... some tout it as the ultimate answer and the only things criminals fear (which is bollocks)... and others scream that human life is infinitely expensive and can never have a price (which is also bollocks).

In the meantime: I'll be making closer friends with the Russian lady I hung out with today

---

A civilised society doesn't kill people.

False. There is no requirement in civility which requires one not kill people. Indeed... some of the most civilized people I have ever seen have been assassins.

In the most serious cases you stick them in jail.

No... in the most serious cases: I kill them swiftly. It is you who idealize that they should waste away in prison until they kick it (effectively a death sentence carried out over the course of sometimes scores of years. This is a death penalty.)

"There are no civilized or barbaric peoples... only different cultures."

So that – if it does turn out to be the wrong verdict (again), and an innocent person was jailed for decades and his/her life was irreparably destroyed – society can at least try to rectify the injustice, release the person, accept responsibility and take financially care of him/her for the rest of his/her destroyed life. That would be the decent thing to do. Not doing that is, consequently, indecent !

A person who has been jailed for decades *has* had their life destroyed. What... you think that because they aren't dead that the world will go on as if nothing ever happened? Times are different behind the bars and outside of them.

Prisons are about the most barbaric creations I know of. Death is not only preferable... it is decent and an honorable way to go. Wasting away in your cell for years while they decide to let you go or keep you rotting... there is no decency in this. It stands quite close to rape on the scale of despicable actions.

The 'decent' thing to do is neither imprison nor kill the person... but to keep a somewhat closer eye on them and perhaps restrict their access to some things. But this is also expensive... as decency always is expensive. I will take death over imprisoned for life (whether guilty or not I do not care) every single time I am given the option.

Duh!
They are sold us as serving the concept of 'justice' (ring a bell?). But IRL they of course don't, as e.g. 12% wrongly executed 'murderers' prove.

No, it doesn't ring any bells. Law is order... since when has order been just?

Accepting that is not only accepting immoral, perverted justice, but also accepting a statistically flawed system.
And that's just plain stupid. No morals involved.

I am told that being economical is stupid. All the smart kids are deep in credit card debt. Duh! Of course I should join them. I'd have to be a moron not to.

How is a system that is 88% accurate "flawed"? That sounds to me like there is room for improvement, but the system is correct roughly 8/9ths of the time. That's fantastic, considering the subject.

You wouldn't accept a PC that's failing 12% of the time, but you would accept a justice system that fails in 12% of cases, and kills people in your name ?

I certainly would accept a PC that fails 12% of the time... so don't stick words in my mouth. Infact, I used a computer for a year and a half who had a faulty disk drive, terrible power brick that rarely worked, and had a habit of turning off without warning about once a week

12% failure rate is the same as 88% success rate. I'll take that any day over serial killers and psychos walking free as butchers. And perhaps it is obvious... but I really don't give a shit over killing people. Get over it.