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: SilentZ who wrote (162850)	3/4/2003 1:19:32 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575303

the chances of executing someone innocent are just too high. Well, the chances of executing some who is innocent are too high -- but that doesn't mean we shouldn't execute anyone. I respected the governor of IL for what he did, because he did it out of conviction. But really, pragmatically, if one death row inmate in a few thousand is executed in error, it really is better in my view than allowing these people to stay in prison forever, or worse, get out on parole to create even more victims. In reality, the notion that the death rows are full of innocents is utter nonsense. There may be a couple of people there who are innocent, but it isn't widespread. Perhaps my attitude is unfair, but it is pragmatic.

To: SilentZ who wrote (162850)	3/4/2003 2:30:05 AM
From: richard surckla	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575303

I believed in the death penalty until a year or so ago when the statistics that changed the mind of the governor of Illinois were released... the chances of executing someone innocent are just too high. This means that David Westerfield could be innocent. If you question his guilt then you must let him go. If you can't see the guilt to execute then how can you see the guilt to incarcerate? Perhaps it just makes you feel better... you know... "thou shall not kill."