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: J_F_Shepard who wrote (798481)	7/31/2014 1:43:19 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 1580041

BS: As usual you are barking up the wrong tree with speculative coulda's and nothing solid to hang your hat on. First: I have already reported to you twice now that (three times counting this post) I do not at this time consider the Death Penalty to be a just resolution for heinous criminals for two reasons. 1) The judicial system has not proven to be infallible in determining guilt and, 2) When the state kills a citizen it violates the premise of our constitutional right to life, at least when viewed as a secular restriction, which is what we do. Secondly: even though we can agree to 'not supporting' the death penalty as it stands, the numbers you offer are speculative for political convenience; where as; the numbers of crimes including homicides committed by heinous criminals who are released from prison are based on real time statistics not speculation, large numbers of real gruesome crimes, committed against real innocent people, as a result of a real incompetent sentencing system. Yet you support this action by the state whole heartedly. with no explanation for your position.

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (798481)	8/11/2014 12:46:03 AM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 1580041

Hi J_F_Shepard; Re the estimate that 4.1% of prisoners are "exonerated", some problems with the study. First, a lot of those prisoners had other crimes that they should have been hung for. Second, "exonerated" is a bit much; what's sufficient to get them off death row is to show that some major part of evidence was invalid. Or things that have nothing to do with the crime like "my attorney sucked". Third, the assumption of the study was that: It says that if all death-sentenced defendants remained under this sentence indefinitely, as opposed to being taken off death row due to being resentenced to life in prison or their fate being artificially cut off by the study ending, then 4.1 percent of those prisoners would have otherwise been exonerated. But this assumption can only be used if the exoneration rate is constant over time. Instead, recent years have seen a big increase in the use of DNA to exonerate prisoners. So the rate is not constant and cannot be extrapolated out to infinity. Note that they don't give the actual rate of exoneration. My suspicion is that they artificially bumped the number up by using inapplicable (because of changes in the exoneration rate) statistics. -- Carl