161–170 of 242 posts
Be careful how you read this number.
This is NOT the proportion of convicts wrongfully killed. This is the number that have wrongfully received a death sentence.
A death sentence is nearly always appealed, and usually multiple times.
The number of convicts sentenced to be executed that subsequently fail every single appeal is likely far, far smaller than that statistic.
Don't forget to explicitly vote no on 66 if you are voting yes on 62. If both of them pass, the one with more 'yes' votes will supersede the other.
States should not allow two propositions that contradict each other to be put up for vote simultaneously. They are generally confusing and almost always favor the status quo at the expense of most citizens who don't have time to understand the nuances of each prop/issue/initiative/ammendment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the single best argument. The single best reason is the immorality of killing. If you want to gouge a society's level of civilization, look at their prisons. What sets humanity apart is the ability of reason to control instinct. It has taken us from beast to philosopher to The Weather Channel, and its measure is how we treat those everyone hates.
One of the best measures for whether or not a country is civilized or not (or where it sits on a scale of civilization) is to see how they treat their prison inmates, people with mental issues and people without income. In other words: those over which society wields a lot of power who do not have much power of their own.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not only did Californians vote to reinstate the death penalty, they then voted to impeach the justices of the State Supreme Court, including the Chief Justice, who actively blocked its use after it became law again. So I don't think there is much argument that the courts were just implementing the will of the people.
I didn't make that argument. I was arguing that the people wanted contradictory things. The courts are just caught in the middle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't make that argument. I was arguing that the people wanted contradictory things. The courts are just caught in the middle.
The people didn't want contradictory things, they wanted the death penalty, and they wanted the courts to implement it. The court wasn't caught in the middle, it was just composed of judges with opinions out of alignment with the general population.
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2016/10/19/three-states-t...
Of course there are error rates in our judicial system. It would be impossible to not have them. But these errors are not confined to death penalty cases. We surely wrongfully imprison some people, and wrongly fine others. That does not mean that we shouldn't have fines or prisons.
I don't see a good justification to apply this reasoning to the death penalty but not other forms of punishment.
Therefore, if you're opposed to the death penalty and intend to vote yes on both measures--reasoning, for instance, that the reforms on 66 such as expedited appeals for death row inmates are an improvement regardless of whether 62 passes--you're undermining your own vote.
I, like pg, am against the death penalty but I don't agree with the reasoning in this essay. Of course there are error rates in our judicial system. It would be impossible to not have them. But these errors are not confined to death penalty cases. We surely wrongfully imprison some people, and wrongly fine others. That does not mean that we shouldn't have fines or prisons. I don't see a good justification to apply th…