another botched execution.

[Poisonshady313]

I'm asserting the actual number of innocents to be greater or equal to zero. Which also means the probability is greater or equal to zero.

Having the possibility of innocent people on death row is relevant. I showed how changing the input from 0 to greater than 0 affects the output from 0 to greater or equal to 0.

I'm saying that innocent people having been sentenced to death isn't all by itself proof that innocent people have been executed. So many more people have been sentenced to death than have been executed. The appeals process exists so that wrongly convicted individuals can have their sentence overturned.

 

[Ingledsva]

This still does not do away with the fact that innocent people are put to death.
It still does not acknowledge that no sharpshooter is 100% accurate. Missing the "bullseye" by even less than an inch can mean the difference between a quick kill and bleeding out to death.
It's best to err to side of caution and prevent the mistake of allowing the state to murder an innocent life. Or just do away with the whole hypocrisy of the state allowing itself to kill while telling everyone else they cannot kill.
There are hardly anymore kings to assault the sovereignty of, and a crime rarely ever does actually harm the public at large. Violent offenders should be put away, but putting them down is just too risky of putting down someone who is innocent (so is prison, but you can set someone free of a prison sentence, you cannot undo death).

I'm all for the death sentence. I don't believe we should have to pay to keep murderers alive. We also don't have the room in the USA.

Yes, there will be some innocent people killed. This is very unfortunate. and allowing polygraphing back in, and trained people to read expression, and voice modulation, etc., would cut down on innocent people being convicted, and thus executed.

However - should we stop all use of medicine? People die from pretty much every medication out there, - including Aspirin.

Operations? People die during them too.

We definitely should ban doctors as several studies have shown that they accidently kill more people each year then cancer does.

In other words we always allow for a certain amount of unfortunate innocent deaths, for the greater benefit of the rest.

*

 

[suncowiam]

I'm saying that innocent people having been sentenced to death isn't all by itself proof that innocent people have been executed. So many more people have been sentenced to death than have been executed. The appeals process exists so that wrongly convicted individuals can have their sentence overturned.

It says our sentencing process is not perfect. If any number of innocents is placed into out death row pool which is the exact same pool of people that can be executed, then the % of innocents being executed is greater or equal to zero.

It does not prove that there are innocents being executed but I believe it raises reasonable certainty that innocents can be executed in such a process.

I'm actually in favor of the death sentence but can't argue that our system is perfect even with an appeals process.

 

[Koldo]

# of innocent people that was placed on death row > 0

With that assertion, could one assume the following?

# of innocent people executed >= 0

As opposed to:

# of innocent of death row = 0
Then
# of innocent executed = 0

How is it not relavent the number of innocent people placed on death row?

Please, read my post again.

 

[suncowiam]

Examples of people being freed after being put on the death row are irrelevant as to how many people are wrongfully executed.

I consider that to be a rather negligible advantage considering how much time it takes to actually get through the execution.

Please, read my post again.

What post are you referring to specifically?

Time is not a correlation to innocents on death row being set free or being executed, unless you can prove this yourself.

I'm just going to add the following while you distinguish your post:
It is the process that shows fault. The process of an appeal has the same error as the process of showing guilt in the first place. Possibly, you are reducing the % of innocents being executed, but no one can prove that it is 0% unless you can prove that innocents are never sentenced. Emperically, we know this is not true due to hindsight.

 

[Koldo]

What post are you referring to specifically?

Time is not a correlation to innocents on death row being set free or being executed, unless you can prove this yourself.

I'm just going to add the following while you distinguish your post:
It is the process that shows fault. The process of an appeal has the same error as the process of showing guilt in the first place. Possibly, you are reducing the % of innocents being executed, but no one can prove that it is 0% unless you can prove that innocents are never sentenced. Emperically, we know this is not true due to hindsight.

I was referring to the first post you quoted to. Not on this post of yours.
Read that post again. Your reply was not pertinent to that post.

 

[suncowiam]

I was referring to the first post you quoted to. Not on this post of yours.
Read that post again. Your reply was not pertinent to that post.

I'm going to respectfully back out of this conversation because I'm tired and will focus on my weekend. I believe I answered you but I don't really care about the topic that much to continue this. =)

My apologies. Have a good one.

 

[Koldo]

I'm going to respectfully back out of this conversation because I'm tired and will focus on my weekend. I believe I answered you but I don't really care about the topic that much to continue this. =)

My apologies. Have a good one.

Sure. No problem.