Lethal Injection Cruel & Unusual? Options

[impala454]

Yeah, I never said anything remotely near that as well:
What I draw is that you don't have to have the death penalty in order to have low crime statistics.

it's still completely irrelevant though, like i said you've got completely different cultures, population densities, laws, punishments, court systems (or lack therof).

[blaarg]

but that's the exact numbers you posted! all i did was perform the division to make it a percentage (more meaningful number). whether you say that 4.55 in 100,000 are murdered, or say you have a 0.00455% chance of being murdered, it's exactly the same statistic. it just looks worse when you say it one way rather than the other . that's where statistics can bite ya in the ass.

I don't see how you can authoritatively say that a percentage is "a more meaningful number." I think that is subjective at best.
Also, they are not exactly equivalent. Assuming that the act of murder was a random event, then I would have a .00455% chance of getting murdered. If I stole millions of dollars from a Mob Boss and was not smart enough to leave the city, then I would have a 99% chance of being murdered.

I concede that they are two different ways of looking at the statistics. Where one way you are concerned as an individual, you aren't going to see much of a difference, however, if you look at it spanning an entire population, there is, at least in my opinion (you might not think that way) that there is somewhat of a difference.

One final thing (at least on this front), if you took your approach on saying that there are (to paraphrase, not to quote) "such a slight chance of these things happening to me it doesn't lend itself to much concern" then what can you say about other things: terrorism, medicine to cure non-prominent diseases (just to name the first two that come to my head). When one follows that train of thought, its a slippery slope to unintentionally implying a lot of other things.

[blaarg]

it's still completely irrelevant though, like i said you've got completely different cultures, population densities, laws, punishments, court systems (or lack therof).

so to argue that the death penalty reduces crime is also a futile effort as well because of the same factors?

[THECHICKEN]

you guys have successfully misread every post i've put in this thread. you keep reading further than what I"m putting down. I never once said people want to go to jail. I don't have to link anything... the proof is in the pudding, you guys were the ones that posted that 60% of the prison pop is repeat offenders. the mofos obviously don't feel that jail is a bad enough punishment to stop commiting crimes once they get out!
if it's so easy to find why the hell didn't you just link it or quote it? geez am I gonna have to debate with myself now?

Thats just it, you aren't debating... and im tired of hitting my head against a wall.

One proffessor today said something that is absolutely golden: "don't argue... because hammering someone until they finally give up ARGUING with you just makes you annoying. The key is PERSUADING someone to your view."

Multiple people put how they think the numbers of repeat offenders is because of a societal cycle of condemning and never reintegrating into society. And instead of trying to persuade us why we were off the mark you do your normal "Where is your evidence of everything you happen to think on every subject, to prove that MY (impala's) belief about the system being TOO easy is wrong?"

You haven't proved shit about your single hypothesis of jail being too easy (and thats the reason for repeat offenders) and yet you try to say you are arguing by continually screaming for evidence on something that is theoretical.

Statistics show that even with a confirmed system of not reporting attacks by fellow inmates, there are lots of rapes, attacks, and fraud. BUT WHY AM I TRYING TO LOOK THAT UP? Why do i need to show that prison is actually a horrible place to settle impalas belief that prison is too easy, instead of just making an argument that the reason we have repeat offenders is because we don't REHABILITATE THEM?

Who cares about the statistics so much that we have to argue about what .23 of 1000 people means?

/rant complete
(lol im so tired... apologies for retarded fatigue speech)

[impala454]

I don't see how you can authoritatively say that a percentage is "a more meaningful number." I think that is subjective at best.
Also, they are not exactly equivalent.

yes, they are exactly equivalent.

4.55/100,000 = 0.00455 %

this data tells you exactly what it says: 0.00455% of our population in the US is murdered each year. it's a matter of looking at numbers in a meaningful way. I don't know how else to explain it. If you buy two lottery tickets, your chances of winning the jackpot do literally double. As does your chance of being murdered if you're a citizen of the US over one of the countries in your list that has 2.275/100k. but your chances are still virtually zero in both cases. so yes, technically the US has more murders per capita, but it's such a small amount it doesn't compare. it's the same as making a statement that a vehicle that gets 20.0001 mpg is better than one that gets 20.0000 mpg. technically yes it's better. is it meaningful? no.

[impala454]

so to argue that the death penalty reduces crime is also a futile effort as well because of the same factors?

as is likewise the effort to argue that removing the death penalty would have a positive effect.

I didn't start this debate. someone else mentioned that the death penalty itself is cruel & unusual, and then started dropping blanket generalizations of other countries.

[impala454]

Thats just it, you aren't debating... and im tired of hitting my head against a wall.

One proffessor today said something that is absolutely golden: "don't argue... because hammering someone until they finally give up ARGUING with you just makes you annoying. The key is PERSUADING someone to your view."

Multiple people put how they think the numbers of repeat offenders is because of a societal cycle of condemning and never reintegrating into society. And instead of trying to persuade us why we were off the mark you do your normal "Where is your evidence of everything you happen to think on every subject, to prove that MY (impala's) belief about the system being TOO easy is wrong?"

You haven't proved shit about your single hypothesis of jail being too easy (and thats the reason for repeat offenders) and yet you try to say you are arguing by continually screaming for evidence on something that is theoretical.

Statistics show that even with a confirmed system of not reporting attacks by fellow inmates, there are lots of rapes, attacks, and fraud. BUT WHY AM I TRYING TO LOOK THAT UP? Why do i need to show that prison is actually a horrible place to settle impalas belief that prison is too easy, instead of just making an argument that the reason we have repeat offenders is because we don't REHABILITATE THEM?

Who cares about the statistics so much that we have to argue about what .23 of 1000 people means?

/rant complete
(lol im so tired... apologies for retarded fatigue speech)

how do I provide statistics of something that doesn't happen? it's you guys claiming that all these terrible things happen. it's you guys who claimed that 60% of people in jail are repeat offenders. obviously jail wasn't bad enough to deterr them from commiting another crime! what other stat do you need than what's already been posted!??

[blaarg]

this data tells you exactly what it says: 0.00455% of our population in the US is murdered each year. it's a matter of looking at numbers in a meaningful way.

I am curious what rate you would find significant. I mean 20 murders per 100000? Thats only .02% It's still a pretty highly unlikely event, I mean that isn't anywhere NEAR 1%, right? I guess 60K people killed probably would not be enough?
How many thousands of people need to be murdered before it is considered a substantial increase?

I'm done with this. It's your prerogative if you want to view your chance of dying due to homicide as the "more meaningful way" to look at the data over taking into consideration the thousands of American lives who would benefit from a homicide rate similar to other developed countries.

[Testm0nkey]

do you not understand that its been shown that more progressive detentions/prisons have less of the same people coming back. not dissappearing off the planet but because they arent being arrested/going to court

so an actual implemented rehabilitation/job work orientated prison system deters crime and repeat offenders more than putting people under lock and key 24/7 with assault rifles. this is common sense for most people

[impala454]

I'm done with this. It's your prerogative if you want to view your chance of dying due to homicide as the "more meaningful way" to look at the data over taking into consideration the thousands of American lives who would benefit from a homicide rate similar to other developed countries.

but you're comparing our country to another. doing it by percentage of population that is murdered... how else are you supposed to look at it?? saying "but, but, it's 1000 people so that sounds like a lot" doesn't change the fact that the difference in the numbers is pretty much insignificant.

[THECHICKEN]

how do I provide statistics of something that doesn't happen? it's you guys claiming that all these terrible things happen. it's you guys who claimed that 60% of people in jail are repeat offenders. obviously jail wasn't bad enough to deterr them from commiting another crime! what other stat do you need than what's already been posted!??

Sorry, i can't take that post serious without statistics,

Please provide statistics it doesn't happen, thanks

(by the way, this is my default response to anything you say now... we'll see how well the "argument" goes)

[impala454]

do you not understand that its been shown that more progressive detentions/prisons have less of the same people coming back. not dissappearing off the planet but because they arent being arrested/going to court

so an actual implemented rehabilitation/job work orientated prison system deters crime and repeat offenders more than putting people under lock and key 24/7 with assault rifles. this is common sense for most people

how can you make this statement/comparison?? we do not currently put people under lock and key 24/7 with assault rifles. we give them their own space and cable TV.

[impala454]

Sorry, i can't take that post serious without statistics,

Please provide statistics it doesn't happen, thanks

you guys were the ones that provided that statistic (60% of jailbirds are repeat offenders). so if that statistic is wrong then fine.

(by the way, this is my default response to anything you say now... we'll see how well the "argument" goes)

in other words, you've got nothing else to say so you're just gonna stick your fingers in your ears and go "lalalalalallaala" like a little child. how disappointing.

[THECHICKEN]

you guys were the ones that provided that statistic (60% of jailbirds are repeat offenders). so if that statistic is wrong then fine.
in other words, you've got nothing else to say so you're just gonna stick your fingers in your ears and go "lalalalalallaala" like a little child. how disappointing.

HAHAHAHA

i was mimicking WHAT YOU DO AT ALL POINTS OF ANY ARGUMENT

god that made my day...

So basically you going against common sense (by saying there is no violence in prison and its too easy) and then bitching CONSTANTLY about no statistics to back up THEORY strikes you as fine. Yet even people DO PROVIDE YOU with statistics you put your fingers in your ears an go "lalalalalalalalallalalalalala"

So call it what you like, i will continue to give back what you like to dish... enjoy

[THECHICKEN]

how can you make this statement/comparison?? we do not currently put people under lock and key 24/7 with assault rifles. we give them their own space and cable TV.

Please evidence this with a link or statistics... i don't believe you