Live data from Hacker News

A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

aclu.org

481–490 of 513 posts

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#481
post #353
post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similarly to how China would react to someone talking about Tianamen Square which isn't public knowledge but knowledge of it would cause a massive shit storm that would undermine the security of the state. It's not what happened, it's the idea of one man standing up to the state that strikes fear into their hearts.

I would wager that almost every educated person in China knows exactly what happened at Tiananmen Square. Certainly every chinese person I've ever really gotten to know knew all about it. The politics around it is complicated, but there is an acceptance of sorts that there's some items the government does not want dwelled upon, and that's one of them. Don't underestimate Chinese political sophistication, especially a…

I'd be happy to accept that wager, http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/199765/24-years-later-chines...

Beijing University from what I understand is where China's elite school (when not schooling overseas)

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#482
post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure North Korea used the exact same reasoning when they didn't sign.

Point being?

The point being whatever you want to make of the similarities in the human rights records between the US and North Korea.

Perhaps you think what North Korea does is the proper way to interact with the world, perhaps you think that the US should be the moral lead for countries like the Sudan, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Afganistan, and Croatia instead of the moral follower.

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#483
post #365
post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Grabbing a stat off of Wikipedia, almost 18,000 people died in drinking-related vehicular accidents in the US in 2006. Maybe attempted murder is a little extreme, but I think negligent homicide would be right on the mark. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunk_driving_in_the_United_Sta...

Yeah, not trying to downplay its seriousness. I honestly did not know how much alcohol impairs one's driving ability - I would have thought maybe 2 or 3 times, turns out it's more like 20x. Well, I learned my lesson. I was just saying that attempted murder is when you actually attempt to murder someone. It's not the same, not at all. As a whimsical thought experiment, care to explain why the other 60% of fatal accide…

No, it's not "you've been drinking" -> 20x more dangerous. Much idiocy has been put forth by people who are unable to understand basic layman's toxicology/pharmacology. Drugs have effects. More of the substance has more of an effect. Step functions where a little of a substance has zero effect, shifting to a major effect with a little more, are extremely rare. It is never the case, for example, that a dose of ionizing radiation goes from "not dangerous" to "dangerous" suddenly - we may measure a low dose at 5 cancers per 100,000 and a high dose at 5,000 cancers per 100,000, but there is always presumed to be some effect.

And yet we have media organizations saying things like:

" Washington (CNN) -- A common benchmark in the United States for determining when a driver is legally drunk is not doing enough to prevent alcohol-related crashes that kill about 10,000 people each year and should be made more restrictive, transportation safety investigators say.

The National Transportation Safety Board recommended on Tuesday that all 50 states adopt a blood-alcohol content (BAC) cutoff of 0.05 compared to the 0.08 standard on the books today and used by law enforcement and the courts to prosecute drunk driving.

The NTSB cited research that showed most drivers experience a decline in both cognitive and visual functions with a BAC of 0.05. "

Of course we have a decline in cognitive and visual functions - that's what a depressant does. At any dose. So long as we have drinking as a major societal institution, and we have bodies that slowly process alcohol, and we have an automotive-mobile culture, there is some nonzero number of deaths we will prefer to tolerate every year due to drunk driving, whether it's 1,000,000 or 10,000 or 100.

---

While there may be some distribution of how well people deal with a certain degree of drunkenness, the basic objective fact that we possess to measure impairment is BAC. Limits vary geographically and through history - in the US we have had experience with thresholds at 0.05%, 0.08%, 0.1%, and 0.15% in various eras and places.

A BAC of 0.01% doesn't significantly harm anyone - it is barely detectable. A BAC of 0.05% poses some minor statistical increase in danger, and is generally the minimum people seek out to 'get a buzz'. A BAC of 0.1% indicates moderate impairment - about what you thought, several times more dangerous. It's only when you get to a BAC of around 0.2% that it becomes 20x more dangerous. At a BAC of around 0.3% and up, on the other hand, one generally loses consciousness. Death from alcohol intoxication (assuming no complications) occurs at an average of about 0.45% BAC (that is the approximate LD50).

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Americans are fascinated with race. It's used as an explanation for practically every kind of social injustice. To me, economic situation is much more important here. After all, outside of a serious mental illness, a wealthy person will not go and try to break into someone else's house. There are cultural aspects that have developed to support certain behaviors within an economic setting, there is plain ignorance, bu…

> Americans are fascinated with race. Americans are fascinated with race because our cities look like this: http://www.radicalcartography.net/chicagodots_race_big.jpg . Moreover, it's hardly unique to Americans. Racial and ethnic conflicts are common across the whole world. The U.S. is still dealing with a legacy of slavery and desegregation that ended only recently. When the Governor of Alabama promised "segregation…

I'm afraid you are missing my point. History is history, what happened happened and there isn't anything we can do about it. My point is simply that non-discrimination policies without tangible focus on economic wellbeing is meaningless and will have zero impact.

Yes, on average black population is at an economic disadvantage when compared to white. Yes, there are historic reasons for that. But the problem is not that they were disadvantaged, but that they stay disadvantaged, much of it through somewhat self-sustaining social processes.

What I mean by self-sustaining, in this case, is the cycles of criminal activities/violence many of these communities are gripped by. The three strikes law hurts these communities the most not because they are black, but because the economic situation is such that people are compelled to steal or commit other crimes. Not only that, but it is socially acceptable to be involved in criminal activity. Both make repeat offenses more likely.

On the flip side, the suburban voters are acting very rationally. It's all in how you ask the question. "Should a repeat rapist be prevented from hurting anyone else?" Most people will answer yes. "Should a person convicted repeatedly of serious violent crimes be prevented from hurting anyone else?" Again, most people will answer yes.

Now, break these statements into what lawmakers and law-enforcement can actually implement, and you get something a long the lines of "people that commit multiple felonies should be sentenced to life without parole". Then the same lawmakers start expanding what a "felony" is to include non-violent crimes, and so on... Everyone appears to be acting somewhat rationally, but the end result is a lot less clear cut.

What we really need to focus is changing the economic situation, then the cultural aspects will follow, and only then we will have fewer stories like this and fewer victims in general.

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#485
post #22
post #7

It's a crying shame. Normally that's an empty phrase, but it describes this. I can't imagine reading this and not feeling tears well up. No sense of what I would call humanity. From what perspective does this make the world a better place? What am I missing about being human that this fits into that I don't understand?

Does anybody else constantly live in a state of guilt? So many lives lost and wars fought just to get us to where we are, and we reap the benefits. I feel so guilty for having a good paying job in the city. I'm not adding any value to the world, none at all. I tinker with a few codes every day and make silly amounts of money, when there's people struggling to put food on the table working 18 hour days. I need to do s…

Change your life. Go work for a non-profit.

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#487
post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people are aware of the fact that the ACLU is a civil liberties advocacy organization and that this naturally biases towards the left wing Does it? I can think of any number of civil liberties which I would associate with the "right" wing of American politics. Right to bear arms, for example, freedom of speech and religion, right to life. The "stand your ground" phenomenon, a very American thing, is definitely righ…

I can think of any number of civil liberties which I would associate with the "right" wing of American politics. The ACLU, for example, was a leading plaintiff working to get the Citizens United ruling in favor of freedom of speech including corporate advocacy. The same ACLU is a strong Second Amendment supporter. And the NSA reform bills in the Congress have about equal support from both parties.

In a smaller example, the ACLU recently supported my father-in-law's small church in its suit against a local government ordinance restricting their ability to pass out literature on public sidewalks. Religious proselytizing usually falls more under the domain of the right than the left.

People sometimes like to paint their side as "for freedom" and the other side as "wants to restrict you", but the reality is far more complicated, changing issue-by-issue and occasionally covering legitimate tradeoffs where both sides might be considered "for freedom".

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#488
post #365
post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Grabbing a stat off of Wikipedia, almost 18,000 people died in drinking-related vehicular accidents in the US in 2006. Maybe attempted murder is a little extreme, but I think negligent homicide would be right on the mark. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunk_driving_in_the_United_Sta...

Yeah, not trying to downplay its seriousness. I honestly did not know how much alcohol impairs one's driving ability - I would have thought maybe 2 or 3 times, turns out it's more like 20x. Well, I learned my lesson. I was just saying that attempted murder is when you actually attempt to murder someone. It's not the same, not at all. As a whimsical thought experiment, care to explain why the other 60% of fatal accide…

I learned to drive in the mid 90s and it was repeatedly hammered into my skull that drunk driving is extremely dangerous. That included in school testing on a table showing impairment as a function of weight and number of drinks. This was all standard as part of the licensing process in suburban NJ at the time.

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#489
post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagreeing with your interpretation of the Second Amendment does not mean they do not support civil rights. Nor does spending their money and time defending civil rights that don't have massive organizations devoted to defending them.

Yeah, I get that the ACLU's actions regarding the 2nd Amendment are defensible. That wasn't the topic. The topic was the claim that the ACLU is a "strong supporter" of the second amendment. Do you know a definition of "strong supporter" that is appropriate for the ACLU's actions regarding the Second Amendment? No, I don't want to hear about how great the ACLU is. No, I don't want to hear about the ACLU really does su…

I think they're a strong supporter of the Second Amendment as per the way they interpret it; they have filed a number of briefs in support of cases that fit their definition.

Let's stop with the farce: your complaint is that you don't like their interpretation, and so you choose to change the topic and blur the issue on a completely different thread to grind that ax of yours.

Re: A living death: Sentenced to die behind bars for what?

#490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Driving is a privilege granted by society, not a right. If you Demonstrate that you no longer deserve that privilege, then yeh you should lose it for life.

"Driving is a privilege, not a right" is just something MADD made up to justify unusual penalties. You could just as well say "fire is a privilege, not a right" and claim that arsonists should be prohibited from heating their homes in the winter. As a policy it doesn't make any sense.

It's weird you chose that strawman because actually people do need a permit to operate large fires in public and I am pretty sure a convicted arsonist would be denied this privilege.
Post reply on HN