Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The real reason to end the death penalty

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 546 posts

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#61

Post by GuB-42 »

wideareanetwork wrote: post #2

I think no other justification is needed to end the death penalty than “it’s inhuman and barbaric”. Even discussing other factors arguments and considerations dilutes the core point that’s it’s straight up wrong unethical and inhuman to murder others in the name of the law. Paul Graham has a valid point, but if you say “it’s wrong cause it’s inaccurate”, implies it’s right if it’s accurate. And it’s not... the death…

That is not a helpful argument. It certainly is inhuman and barbaric, but is it less inhuman and barbaric than the alternatives?

Criminals sentenced to death are supposed to be a danger to society so great that the only solution is to eliminate them. So, typical trolley problem: is it better to kill a criminal or let him go, potentially resulting in the death or several more innocent victims. Prison for life is another option, but is permanently restraining someone and endangering guards and other inmates a good alternative?

So yes, other justifications are needed. And the article gives one.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#63

Post by timeslip1523 »

tchalla wrote: post #7

> This circus of incompetence and dishonesty is the real issue with the death penalty. First order thinking. There's a time to argue with first principles and there's a time to make arguments via "back door hacks" in the guise of amenability. Life and death may not be the best time to use "hacky" arguments because down the line there may be do more harm than good. Particularly, in common-law systems. Also, > When int…

It's been a pejorative since nietzsche!

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#64

Post by ehnto »

mettamage wrote: post #40
tompccs wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean to pick on you specifically, but this sort of remark is why the left and intellectuals more widely fail at winning politically. Rather than use arguments that are amenable even to people who disagree on the fundamentals, you would rather retain the moral high-ground by refusing even to debate on their terms, thereby failing to actually influence policy (in this case a matter of life and death). If the de…

Sure, from a persuasion point of view I agree. But from a "trying to understand another human" point of view, I'd recommend you to read the Wikipedia page on ethics [1]. My own education on the topic: a course in college (as a business student) and watching some of the Harvard lectures on ethics [0]. IMO ethics courses teaches people to gain a more fine-grained vocabulary on explaining their own positions and underst…

The trap you are both falling into is the thought that political discussions centre around trying to understand the other persons point of view. It is almost always the other way around, one person trying to persuade an unwilling party that they are wrong. So as the poster said, as right as you are, you would still lose the political argument if that was how you tried to argue for your view.

You can be correct all day long and change nothing, or you can be persuasive and meet them in their thought bubble to coerce them toward aligning with your views. You can't just pop their world view with statements of fact, because they may very well think your fact is wrong. In this case not everyone believes the death penalty is immoral, so if your only argument is "the death penalty is immoral" you will change nothing.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#65

Post by capableweb »

cies wrote: post #36

This is very US-centric. > at least 4% of people on death row are innocent. I expect in Scandinavia these numbers are different. But they dont have death penalty. From the news I learn that US cops also kill innocent people in the street. And it's military wages illegal wars killing 100s of 1000s overseas. I think the US has a weird relation with violence. The death penalty and how it uses it is merely a symptom.

> This is very US-centric.

Yeah, considering the US have a bunch of problems related to violence (mass shootings, overzealous police force, invading other countries left and right), it makes sense that other violent processes are also problematic in the same environment. I agree with you death penalty is merely a symptom of something else in the whole system of the country.

Makes it extra weird when you consider how prude the US is when it comes to sexuality, while violence is something that is not only used as entertainment, but even many feel pride about.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#66

Post by mattmanser »

tchalla wrote: post #14
tompccs wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean to pick on you specifically, but this sort of remark is why the left and intellectuals more widely fail at winning politically. Rather than use arguments that are amenable even to people who disagree on the fundamentals, you would rather retain the moral high-ground by refusing even to debate on their terms, thereby failing to actually influence policy (in this case a matter of life and death). If the de…

Let's assume the "innocent people get killed" argument abolishes death penalty today. What are the second-order effects of that argument which can be detrimental to the society that you can think of?

Well, none, we have plenty of evidence that there's none. Almost all the countries that have implemented it have lower homicide rates than the US. Usually significantly lower.

Obviously there's probably also various other reasons for that too, like they usually also have heavily restricted gun ownership, but there's certainly no evidence that abolishing the death penalty has adverse effects.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#67

Post by pydry »

bruceb wrote: post #53

Another solution is having a no doubt standard needed for the death penalty as opposed to a beyond a reasonable doubt standard. No doubt standard would require some set elements. DNA + visual recording + electronic records. I used to be anti death penalty but would be ok with it under a no doubt standard. Not for vengeance but simply society can spend the money on other things instead of spending money housing and fe…

Death row is pretty expensive, as is achieving a "no doubt standard". I don't think it would save as much money as you would think.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#68

Post by Causality1 »

wideareanetwork wrote: post #2

I think no other justification is needed to end the death penalty than “it’s inhuman and barbaric”. Even discussing other factors arguments and considerations dilutes the core point that’s it’s straight up wrong unethical and inhuman to murder others in the name of the law. Paul Graham has a valid point, but if you say “it’s wrong cause it’s inaccurate”, implies it’s right if it’s accurate. And it’s not... the death…

That's a philosophical point. In most areas of legal justice, the penalty exacted for transgressions far exceeds the damages. That is to say, the man who steals a hundred dollars or who punches someone in the face loses far more value from his life as punishment than he caused someone else to lose. A life for a life is a rather mild punishment compared to the rest of the justice system, especially considering the death penalty is typically meted out for multiple brutal murders, often preceded by torture and rape. A just world would have these monsters subjected to the same nightmare to which they treated the innocent.

However, I agree with Paul. The fact that anyone not guilty of the crime is executed is unacceptable, to say nothing of the startlingly bad accuracy of the system in practice.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#69

Post by spoonjim »

fighterpilot wrote: post #54
spoonjim wrote: post #17

I have very strong beliefs about the death penalty. I believe it is the only just punishment for murder; that ALL murderers should be executed; that anything less than execution is a grave miscarriage of justice for a crime that is so horrible the mind cannot even wrap around it. I also think that pain should be part of the death penalty... that a murderer doesn’t deserve a quick and painless death but rather a healt…

What if they did the murder because of a brain tumor messing up their impulse control ability? Humans are just complicated machines that go wrong sometimes. I do however share your emotional position and it would make me feel better to see (actual) murderers get the death penalty.

Someone disabled to the point of having no compass for right and wrong would have what is legally known as “diminished mental capacity” and not be convicted of first degree murder.

If you genuinely hallucinate that I am an attacking Pit Bull and kill me, you are not guilty of first degree murder and I would not want you executed.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#70

Post by Sebb767 »

saagarjha wrote: post #5

This is the obvious reason, but of course there are many more: executions are quite expensive, they don't seem to actually deter crime, they're fundamentally pessimistic ("this person will never be useful to society"). Plus, they're kind of unnecessarily cruel: if we wanted to execute people painlessly we could just pump a room full of nitrogen and let the person drift off into unconsciousness and death relatively qu…

> this person will never be useful to society

I'm against the death penalty, but, since the alternative is most likely life in prison, this is very probably true for rightfully convicted.

> My personal guess is that people like to watch for some sort of catharsis which a silent death doesn't give them, but of course I'm not necessarily in a position to judge this well.

There's a very interesting documentary called "how to kill a human being". In it, Michael Portillo explores more humane ways to execute prisoners, but at the end his method is rejected by proponents as the do not want these people to die painless. So you're probably not wrong.

Post reply on HN