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

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#171

Post by dang » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 6:16 PM UTC

sremani wrote: post #167

Death penalty is Lindy. I am not interested in some esoteric academic ethics argument.. in this, I want to hear, from people who lost loved ones - who are against Death penalty. Who endured and still endure the suffering of a losing loved ones. If we get an even split from this group of people, may be then only then I will consider the academic arguments.

The article is all about not having an esoteric academic ethics argument, as its opening sentence makes clear. That's also what the word "real" means in the title.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#172

Post by watwut » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 6:17 PM UTC

tompccs wrote: post #6

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…

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…

The left is getting more votes and it seems like leftist ideas do well in polls. So when it comes to ability to convince people about issues, they actually do well.

Also, I don't really see equivalent expectation routinely placed on right - they are not expected to proactively make compromises on their own heads before they even state position.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#173

Post by Consultant32452 » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 6:20 PM UTC

true_religion wrote: post #139

ehnto wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 da…

It’s all good and well to try and persuade someone, but like the GP sometimes I like to simply state my ideological viewpoint. The problem with narrowly arguing based on someone else’s ideals, is that any agreement isn’t a true meeting of the minds. For example people, once tried to end the deal then penalty by talking about to pain involved in hanging. Proponents agreed and eventually came up with the electric chair…

"You're a bad person if you disagree with me" is a great way to never get what you want. It's not simply stating your position, it's anti-persuasion whether you want it to be or not.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#174

Post by dang » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 6:20 PM UTC

viklove wrote: post #151

ruph123 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 49% of Brits would support the reintroduction of the death penalty ... for murdering a child. You forgot that part didn’t you? If you pull up the poll if death penalty should be reintroduced for all murderers only 32% are in support [0]. Please don’t pick and choose sources to make an argument which wasn’t even captured by the source. Also please don’t extrapolate to other countries like that. Us Europeans left the…

Us Americans left behind the death penalty as well, so you are being a bit nationalistic (racist?). The death penalty is against the law in nearly 1/2 of US states. Even in the states where it is "legal," many have not carried out the procedure in several decades. They simply reserve the right to do so in the case where a child is murdered. > The rest of the civilised world decided on this a long time ago. But please…

You've broken the site guidelines badly, even relative to the rest of this thread, with name-calling, flamebait and slurs. Would you please stop doing that? We ban accounts that post this way—it's destructive to everything this site is intended to be.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#175

Post by dang » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 6:22 PM UTC

ruph123 wrote: post #153

viklove wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Us Americans left behind the death penalty as well, so you are being a bit nationalistic (racist?). The death penalty is against the law in nearly 1/2 of US states. Even in the states where it is "legal," many have not carried out the procedure in several decades. They simply reserve the right to do so in the case where a child is murdered. > The rest of the civilised world decided on this a long time ago. But please…

> But please, go on continuing to believe Europeans are superior to the rest of the world. I remember that working out really well for you guys back in the 1930s. That is unnecessarily snarky. The comment I was replying to was suggesting that basically the UK and the other Europeans would happily welcome back the death penality. Which is not true. I only said that "we" - the strawman used by gp - left it behind and m…

Please don't do this, no matter how provocative another comment was. The proper response is to flag it and ignore it—then the provocation fizzles out, as it should. The site guidelines put it this way: "Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead." That's our euphemistic recoding of "Please don't feed the trolls."

I realize this is not so easy when you belong to a group that's being put down, but we all need to build up our tolerance to that kind of thing, since the alternative is to have it dominate discussion and that would make everything worse.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#176

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 6:22 PM UTC

tompccs wrote: post #6

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…

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…

[deleted]

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#177

Post by DiffEq » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 6:23 PM 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…

In-human; what does this mean? It has been a human condition throughout all ages to kill each other. So by basic observation one could easily conclude it is human to kill each other. Fortunately what has developed over the ages is a framework or legal system for reasons to do so as apposed to just the whim of one individual.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#178

Post by csense » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 6:23 PM 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…

The death penalty used to be much faster. But through a series of laws and court rulings starting in the 1970's, they decided that the case has to go through a super long sequence of appeals and court proceedings, with the intent of making doubly triply extra sure we're not executing innocent people.

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#179

Post by djoldman » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 6:24 PM UTC

On the subject of deterrence:

If someone commits a premeditated crime carrying a guideline sentence of {20 years in State A, vs 30 years in State B} do we really think that they're more likely to commit the crime in State A?

It's my intuition that for the most part, people committing crimes aren't thinking about potential repercussions, much less measuring them.

I mean is someone thinking "Oh, only 10 years? I'll do it. But not if it's 15."?

Re: The real reason to end the death penalty

#180

Post by slibhb » Thu, Apr 22, 2021, 6:25 PM UTC

The best objection to the death penalty is indeed that we can't be trusted to administer it.

I disagree with a lot of comments in this thread. The death penalty is in fact the appropriate punishment for murderers. This is not true in order to deter crime or so that we can create a better society or any other similar rationalization. Justice, by which I mean reciprocity, is an end in itself. A crime should be punished proportionally and the only justification for punishment is guilt.

A simple explanation of this theory of justice:

> A great crime offends nature, so that the very earth cries out for vengeance; that evil violates a natural harmony which only retribution can restore; that a wronged collectivity owes a duty to the moral order to punish the criminal (Yosal Rogat).