@Suzianne saidBodies evolved to stay alive; executing people necessarily involves violence, no matter how it is done. Injecting people with poison was a way for squeamish people to avoid the messiness and persuade themselves that killing would be neat and easy. TN has proven what a delusion that was.
It's Tennessee, man. Almost as bad as Florida.
Firing squads never fail. Firing squad, or not at all.
That said, a N. Korean firing squad is overkill.
https://www.reuters.com/article/world/north-korea-executes-defence-chief-with-an-anti-aircraft-gun-south-korea-agency-idUSKBN0NY01I/
- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 11051
@Rajk999 saidAsking robots to explain human morality?
Here is a good response that that kind of muddled thinking...
Claude AI
****************************
The claim confuses two things that differ in ways that matter morally and legally.
1. Process and authority
A murderer acts on private will, with no authorization and no accountability. An execution follows an investigation, a trial, a conviction by a jury or judge, ...[text shortened]... pt those conclusions, so the principle can't be right as stated.
********************************
- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 11051
@moonbus saidYeah I think there should be a limit to the time frame. If the state doesn't have the resources to do it, then don't do it.
TN failed to execute the previous one, too. Apparently, he was so fat, prison officers couldn't find a vein.
Guess who paid for all his food all those years?
If a state is going to do it at all, then get the job done, I say.
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions/botched-executions
- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 11051
@vivify saidThis is circular logic. It takes a long time because it takes a long time.
That wouldn't reduce death row time, that would lead to more innocent people dying before finding evidence that exonerates them.
It's not just the legal process that is slow; investigations take time. Unless you're rich and can afford a team of lawyers and Private Investigators to work round-the-clock on your behalf, it will take time.
Murder investigations can take ...[text shortened]... e shows make people think a hot-shot sleuth who loves justice can wrap up cases after one car chase.
We aren't talking about Harrison ford in the fugitive here. The evidence was already presented during the trial. Give the a reasonable amount of time, say three weeks, to get an appeal heard by a court, and then be done with it. 30 years is insane.
@wildgrass saidI do not see any point in guarding and feeding someone 28 years before carrying out an execution. The defense had plenty of time to file an appeal; I don’t see any point in filing for a stay 5 minutes before the ax falls and then wasting the Supreme Court’s time to reverse the reversal 3 minutes before the ax falls. Pike admitted killing her victim, so there is no reasonable doubt in this case. She knew what she was doing at the time and that it was murder; no grounds for dismissal as temporary insanity.
Yeah I think there should be a limit to the time frame. If the state doesn't have the resources to do it, then don't do it.
On the other hand, TN has failed twice in a row now to carry out an execution, so, for TN, I think a moratorium and a few high-level resignations are in order.
@wildgrass saidYou are a dumbass. AI search engines simply search for the best answer from sites written by humans.
Asking robots to explain human morality?
- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 11051
@Rajk999 saidYou let the robot decide what is "the best answer" on a complex moral issue where there are multiple correct responses. And the robot is probably pulling text from a few random reddit posts and then you post it here as if it's the definitive conclusion to a human debate that's been happening for centuries.
You are a dumbass. AI search engines simply search for the best answer from sites written by humans.
@wildgrass saidWho said anything about 'definitive conclusion'. Its an opinion.
You let the robot decide what is "the best answer" on a complex moral issue where there are multiple correct responses. And the robot is probably pulling text from a few random reddit posts and then you post it here as if it's the definitive conclusion to a human debate that's been happening for centuries.
You really are so F..ing stupid.
Get a grip. Your stupidity is out of control.
If you have a response to the opinion I posted, then address that.
- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 11051
@Rajk999 saidYou posted the moral opinion of a robot. That was my response.
Who said anything about 'definitive conclusion'. Its an opinion.
You really are so F..ing stupid.
Get a grip. Your stupidity is out of control.
If you have a response to the opinion I posted, then address that.
@wildgrass saidMaybe I should apologise for insulting you earlier. I thought that you were being wilfully stupid and difficult. I now realise that your problem is gross ignorance and that you really do not know how computers work.
You posted the moral opinion of a robot. That was my response.
Computers cannot form opinions. Forming an opinion, in particular ones pertaining to morality, requires a consciousness, some kind of emotional investment and past experiences. All AI does is to regurgitate opinions posted on human generated websites.
I hope that helps. Get some education on the inner workings of computers and AI in particular. Your fear in this area is surely the result of ignorance.
@wildgrass saidGiving shorter deadlines will not speed up evidence being found.
This is circular logic. It takes a long time because it takes a long time.
We aren't talking about Harrison ford in the fugitive here. The evidence was already presented during the trial. Give the a reasonable amount of time, say three weeks, to get an appeal heard by a court, and then be done with it. 30 years is insane.
You want a 3 week deadline when it can take years to find evidence exonerating a death row inmate. Google shows 203 people were exonerated from death row; your deadline would've resulted in the deaths of all those innocent people.
30 years is insane. But is killing a potentially innocent person within 3 weeks better?
- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 11051
@vivify saidCareful with that statement, innocent and exonerated aren't the same. Most of the exonerated are procedural errors or misconduct by some official involved in the case. This doesn't, or at least shouldn't, take years to find. And as I've already said that no amount of appeal or delay or reinvestigation would ever remove the uncertainty altogether. It's an impossible task.
Giving shorter deadlines will not speed up evidence being found.
You want a 3 week deadline when it can take years to find evidence exonerating a death row inmate. Google shows 203 people were exonerated from death row; your deadline would've resulted in the deaths of all those innocent people.
30 years is insane. But is killing a potentially innocent person within 3 weeks better?
But in this situation where the guilty has admitted to the crime, what additional evidence were they patiently waiting for 30 years later?
Maybe we compromise. Three months?
- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 11051
@Rajk999 saidDude you're the one who posted the text from Claude and called it an opinion.
Maybe I should apologise for insulting you earlier. I thought that you were being wilfully stupid and difficult. I now realise that your problem is gross ignorance and that you really do not know how computers work.
Computers cannot form opinions. Forming an opinion, in particular ones pertaining to morality, requires a consciousness, some kind of emotional investment a ...[text shortened]... orkings of computers and AI in particular. Your fear in this area is surely the result of ignorance.
2 edits
@wildgrass saidThe 203 people I mentioned were actually exonerated; they didn't merely have their sentences overturned or reduced:
Careful with that statement, innocent and exonerated aren't the same. Most of the exonerated are procedural errors or misconduct by some official involved in the case. This doesn't, or at least shouldn't, take years to find. And as I've already said that no amount of appeal or delay or reinvestigation would ever remove the uncertainty altogether. It's an impossible task.
...[text shortened]... ional evidence were they patiently waiting for 30 years later?
Maybe we compromise. Three months?
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/policy/innocence
5,000 death row sentences were overturned due to reasons that may include procedural ones; of those, 203 people were found to be wrongly convicted
Those 203 people should not have died simply because you want to speed up the processes.