Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (124582)	9/23/2000 4:19:42 PM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 1580032

combjelly, Texas plugs them (actually pokes them) at a higher rate than any other state, is our crime rate lower? The rate of executions vs. the murder rate is so trivial that your chances of being executed for murdering someone are slimmer than wining a prize in lottery. There is very little predictability in murdering someone -> getting executed. I think the execution rate would have to be much higher to have it's full effect. Joe

To: combjelly who wrote (124582)	9/23/2000 4:51:00 PM
From: TGPTNDR	Respond to of 1580032

CJ RE: <inmates on death row feel that the death penalty is a deterrent to crime. Worked well for them, didn't it?...> I'll bet that if the execution goes through that they don't commit their favorite crime again. Actually, I'm most likely not as cold blooded as I may come off. The vast majority of crimes prosecuted as 'capital cases' should not be. One of the problems in the US judicial system is that Lawyers are paid on the basis of their wins & on the seriousness of the cases they've prosecuted/defended. The prosecutors try to prosecute crimes for the most serious possible interpretation of the defendents actions, frequently based on probability of success as opposed to probability of actual guilt. That's true both on the prosecution and the defense sides. On the defense side it amounts to 'you get what you pay for', clearly not correct in serious cases(I consider anything life threatening to be, by definition, serious.) On the prosecution side you have dingbats trying to 'make a name' by being tough on crime -- who with-hold & invent evidence, etc. I believe that such action should be punnishable by penalties commensurate with those for the crime they are attempting to prosecute -- Screw with evidence in a capital case & you're looking at the chair. It's my opinion that if the Calif. Cops hadn't screwed with the evidence OJ'd be in jail today. There has to be a LOT more truth & morality in law in the US if the legal profession is to regain some credibility. I doubt it'll happen in my lifetime. Re: Dumping them on a secluded island -- I could, perhaps agree with you -- except that I'd prefer that the formal release occurred at around 1000'. tgptndr

To: combjelly who wrote (124582)	9/25/2000 7:41:51 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580032

And no, I don't believe in coddling violent criminals either. I have always favored helicoptering them off to some secluded island and dumping them off. If they make it back, assume that they have something going for them, and give them another chance. Otherwise, so sad. So if a someone say blows up a building with 100 people in it, or is a serial child molester, but they are smart, tough, and lucky enough to make it off the island then society should just accept them and allow them to move around without restriction or further punishment? Tim