Oddbean new post about login | logout This was the argument that finally flipped me on this issue: “So you are saying the govt doesn’t make mistake and would never just kill innocent people?” nostr:note18f67n6wag9c2ksvl8vyfva059f5rptudx764r5pxj3km2237ak2suftvkq
Opposite opinion: Who will pay for their lifetime detention. The annual cost per prisoner is over 200K a year to society. I say we execute the criminals if they can't pay for their cost. Also nowadays, you can have DNA proofs that seals the deal. We could have a protocole where a death sentence cannot be given on testimonies only. Video or DNA proof would be required.
Maybe this is more a problem with the horrific inefficiency of the prison system? Again, a problem of state incompetence. Just because it’s gonna cost a lot isn’t an excuse to potentially murder innocent people. The justification that “sure some of them might be innocent, but think what it costs to keep them alive” just doesn’t seem like a good one, imo
Maybe a better alternative is actually the other direction... e.g. Maximum Penalty, for any crime, being something relatively short, like 5 years. No stacking offenses, no for life, double life without possibility of parole etc. This has the side benefit of providing a mechanism for vigilantes to exact revenge knowing their time costs are limited. If you're of evil intent, relying on gaming the justice system inefficiencies, you'll still have to answer to society. And people like Ross would already be free. Along me many offenders vs feeding the slave prison work complex. just a thought. im sure there's plenty of problems with this but may be worth considering the comparative tradeoffs.
Another thought would be about their punishment being not about how to harm the criminal the most, but how to give restitution to the victims.
I thought it’s not the State that decides, but a jury of citizens? Plus what of those who plead guilty? Lets do this: all prisoners, regardless of sentence, should be put to work to both repay their debt to fellow citizens plus ensure others are not forced to pay for their existence. Those that plead guilty have a choice: kill yourself, or stay in prison and work for free for society until they die of natural causes. Modern crime investigation tech practically eliminates doubt.
Yeah OK they work. That sounds ok
> “Modern crime investigation tech practically eliminates doubt.” I would suspect you have little to no actual experience with our court system. I have to disagree vehemently. Not to mention that even with the horrific problems with *tech literacy* of those with authority, just the general and insane levels of corruption and politicization of our court system make the already unreliable tech situation often meaningless. And aside from even all of that, there remains the deep and serious problem of illegality and morality often diverging massively from each other. In other words there are multiple layers of problems, corruption, and stupidity that permeate the entire “justice system” even after we just ignore the problem with the law itself very often being a miserable insult to the concepts of “fair” or “just.”
These are valid points, but you are OK with executing those that plead guilty? If not, then what you object to is different than what you originally stated as the reason. What I was referring to are cases in which DNA, video/audio recordings identities the suspect 100%. Of course letting a eandom always decide is one of the greatest stupidities of our modern “democracies”. There should be a heavy screening process, as there should be for voting. Otherwise idiocracy is inevitable.
I get it. So people like you would donate to 'prison charities' to pay for criminal prisons. My family won't be paying for that. * In a bitcoin world where forced taxation is very difficult to implement and voluntary taxation is the only way governments survive*
No, is imagine the market solution would basically be the same as the old debtors’ prisons. Where the criminal literally owed the victim certain restitution, and the “prison” they worked in basically earns the fee for keeping them imprisoned and earning for the victim or their family. Could also be interesting in the case of murder and similar crimes, the victim gets to decide what fee they are willing to pay for what conditions the prisoner gets. 🤔 Some ideas to muse on, but we’ve had market based prisons and common law before. There is no shortage of ideas to try and there’s a surprising history of stuff that has worked in the absence of direct political control. Some really interesting systems popped up in the Wild West (book recommendation: The Not so Wild, Wild West). Taxation is essentially both the laziest and most immoral way to sustain anything.
It's actually quite cheap if we eliminated inflation and taxes on our money. Norway sets a very good example with cost effective and humane imprisonment for violent offenders.
I don't want any humane imprisonment for murderers, rapist and pedophiles.
I totally understand, but be careful what you wish on others since it can easily be turned on you.
I am not a criminal. Why should I be fearful of treatments to criminals ?
Everyone always thinks they're the exception until they're not. It's like saying privacy doesn't matter if you have nothing to hide. Criminal is a subjective label and can change.
I don't know where to start but you reasoning is dumb AF I am talking about giving hard sentences to criminal commiting serious crime. What does that have to do with privacy issues and the argument 'nothing to hide' It has nothing to do with that
I agree. Although there are people who deserve death, I'd rather a million people that deserve death not receive it if it prevents just one innocent person from being put to death. When you have politics and power, there will always be innocent people convicted wrongly.