this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
546 points (94.8% liked)
Asklemmy
43755 readers
2282 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What is your stance on the risks of killing innocent people through failure of the justice system?
that's a tough one I can't lie. if the death penalty is on the table, there really needs to be a better justice system with a much harder burden of proof involved
Just from a numerical standpoint...I'd think the difference between these two numbers would be the determining factor for death penalty vs no death penalty.
How many innocent people have been killed on death row.
How many innocent people have been killed by those who Could have been sentenced to death, but were not because the death penalty was not allowed.
Obviously you can't know the exactly number, but if you could get an estimate, and one was larger than the other... then you could answer purely from a "saving X number of innocent lives" perspective.