The real reason to end the death penalty • Hacker News Board

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#111

Post by piva00 » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 10:26 AM UTC

hntroll666 wrote: post #59

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…

> barbaric Sorry, but that's exactly the kind of world we live in. The world simply is barbaric no matter what we would prefer. When people mess up a little bit, we put them through a process that, despite its massive inadequacy, is intended to rehabilitate them so that they can return to society. The death penalty is for when someone commits a crime so severe that they cannot ever return to society. If you are not a…

With this type of argument you attack one of the central tenets of human rights where every human life, no matter what, is worth the same. The moment you define that there are certain crimes where a human life is not the same as other human lives, no matter the reason, you move away from this core tenet.

It's all a matter if you believe in that core piece of universal human rights or not.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#112

Post by chki » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 10:26 AM UTC

throwaway3699 wrote: post #94

chki wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because I care deeply about everybody – no matter what they have done. Because forgiveness and love are my core values, even if it doesn't usually show up in my day to day life. Because revenge is always bad. Torturing somebody no matter their crime would go fundamentally against those few things that I feel very deeply about – not that different from loving my family or caring about the longterm wellbeing of humanit…

What if your love and forgiveness allow a killer to strike again? I share similar values but I'm prepared to compromise on them if necessary. Even incarceration is a compromise. Values are ideals, not absolutes.

I agree that incarceration is a necessary compromise and of course I don't want a killer to strike again. Forgiveness doesn't mean that I'm against all punishment. But I think that it means there always has to be a chance for somebody to change – no matter what they did. Even life sentences without any chance of parole should not be possible: if somebody is no longer a danger to society they should be allowed to return at some point.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#113

Post by jcims » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 10:26 AM UTC

rswail wrote: post #15

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…

This "debate" has been over in all other nations that the US likes to be compared for years. It is similar to the "tough on crime" incarceration "debate" in the US, where perverse incentives and political expediency has led to the US being the highest-per-capita incarcerator in the world. Framing the death penalty debate around "innocent people get killed" will not change the partisan/class perceptions. The US crimin…

>Framing the death penalty debate around "innocent people get killed" will not change the partisan/class perceptions.

I don't agree. All of these moral castigations about it being 'inhumane' or 'barbaric' don't strike me as rational or compelling in the least. I think the idea is humane in the context of those impacted by the crimes in question and I don't see how putting a person in a box for the remainder of their life is qualitatively any less barbaric.

I don't know where pg lands politically but I'd say I'm probably right of center on the American spectrum and for me there are only two persuasive arguments that we should abolish the death penalty. One is that we make mistakes in who gets it, per TFA, and the other is that it's difficult to concretely describe the qualifications of who should get it, risking expansion at the whim of the populace. In other words I absolutely believe there are just executions, I'm just not entirely sure we can create a system to do it justly.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#114

Post by wanderingstan » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 10:26 AM UTC

throwaway3699 wrote: post #81

fighterpilot wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They're still a danger to society. If we start crossing into the metaphysical then we'd have to make excuses for peadophiles having 'messed up impulse control' too. But as another comment pointed out, we do account for this.

It’s not metaphysical, there are documented cases of biological causes (tumor) causing pedophilia: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2943-brain-tumour-cau...

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#115

Post by spoonjim » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 10:26 AM UTC

fighterpilot wrote: post #103

spoonjim wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> “diminished mental capacity” As we learn more about neuroscience, every murderer will look like they have "diminished mental capacity". This legal construct is merely a statement of our ignorance to understand what's actually going on in their brain.

Sure, free will may not exist, but we don’t have much of a civilization if we don’t pretend that it does.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#116

Post by saiya-jin » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 10:27 AM UTC

hntroll666 wrote: post #59

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…

> barbaric Sorry, but that's exactly the kind of world we live in. The world simply is barbaric no matter what we would prefer. When people mess up a little bit, we put them through a process that, despite its massive inadequacy, is intended to rehabilitate them so that they can return to society. The death penalty is for when someone commits a crime so severe that they cannot ever return to society. If you are not a…

Its way way way more complex than that. One point is that you have life imprisonment without parole - the same effect of people not coming back to society is achieved. Another one is expense - death row costs AFAIK are higher than life imprisonment, so the harmed society pays even more.

As for truly horrible crimes (which is something else to each of us), there are also tons of different views - do we want to be in society that is above emotional vengeful reactions, and more about compassionate loving ones? Ie like all good christians/muslims/etc are supposed to be according to their holiest books? You have to start somewhere if you even want to get there. You have to be morally strong to act in smart and compassionate way if you want to claim progress of mankind in this area. And so on.

I don't have a clear position on this myself and not stating some higher moral ground, since there are many pros and cons on both sides and quick emotional reaction to some murderous pedophile is as expected. But I am 100% certain that this very topic reveals a lot about mankind and us humans in our progression to be a better species, compared to primitive uneducated masses of the past. Or regression, its up to us.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#117

Post by spoonjim » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 10:28 AM UTC

anoncake wrote: post #104

spoonjim wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Revenge has no place in a civilized society” is just an opinion. Mine is different. I don’t believe a society is civilized if it treats murderers with anything less than the most extreme vengeance.

Then the world would be better off without you.

That may be, but I can tell you without whom the world would be MUCH better off: murderers.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#118

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 10:28 AM UTC

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…

[deleted]

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#119

Post by piva00 » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 10:29 AM UTC

_hl_ wrote: post #51

donatj wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is a somewhat reasonable argument that a punishment should mirror the crime, and any less than inhuman and barbaric to the inhuman and barbaric lacks actual justice? I’m not saying I agree, I don’t personally support the death sentence, but if you’re actually interested in changing peoples minds it’s good to know where they’re coming from, and why they may not find your argument compelling. I personally…

I'm not from the US, so my knowledge on the death penalty is quite limited. But I clicked on a link posted below listing executions in Texas, and I was shocked to see that the most recent execution was last year for a crime committed back in 1993 . Why?? You've already locked the guy up for almost three decades, what possible benefit is there to executing him now? I get that he ruined (well, ended) someones life, but…

> but what does society gain from ruining his life in turn, to the point of what feels like mental torture: Being locked up for such a long time, all the while knowing that you will eventually just be executed.

From what I gather on Americans' comments about this over the years it's mostly about "not spending taxpayer money" to house, feed and take care of criminals that received a death penalty.

I don't know how true this argument can be given all the costs over decades associated with a death penalty judgment (appeals, preparation for death row, maintaining death rows, etc.)

Quick edit after reading the thread a bit more, an example of what I mentioned: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26900987

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#120

Post by fighterpilot » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 10:31 AM UTC

spoonjim wrote: post #115

fighterpilot wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “diminished mental capacity” As we learn more about neuroscience, every murderer will look like they have "diminished mental capacity". This legal construct is merely a statement of our ignorance to understand what's actually going on in their brain.

Sure, free will may not exist, but we don’t have much of a civilization if we don’t pretend that it does.

The criminal justice system can still function without the false premise of free will and agency, and without the false premise that someone with a brain tumor magically has less agency than someone without a brain tumor but who has some more complicated and less understood problem with their brain.

It can be premised on concepts such as rehabilitation (which I believe mostly can't happen with murderers), deterrence, creating a sense of fairness in society (which builds trust), protecting people from the murderer, and so on.