I am a staunch opposer to the death penalty, and believe no crime, no matter how severe warrants an execution, but I wouldn’t lift a finger to stop the execution of Nestlé executives because they aren’t worth a single calorie spent on their defence.
Biological weapons don’t count unless the flush mechanism fails.
What? I was talking about Vietnam, just because they are communist now doesn’t mean they will stay communist. I didn’t mean that Russia is communist now, perhaps I wasn’t clear in phrasing.
USSR collapsed and looks at Russia now. Just because they are communists now doesn’t mean they won’t become fascist in the future.
Can you trust it would stay that way? There is no such thing as immunity from fascism.
But when the death penalty is available, it’s not just the ultra wealthy who suffer. It’s far easier for the ultra wealthy to use their resources to frame someone they don’t like as a murderer or something and get that person executed. It’s even easier for the state to do that if they are corrupt enough. I’d much rather not give the state the right to sentence anyone to death at any point. Make these ultra rich criminals go to prison for the rest of their lives, make it unpardonable too.
Yes, people do escape, but it’s extremely rare. I’m far more worried about the state having the legal power to execute someone than an individual escaping from prison.
Also, giving the prisoner the choice to either be executed or imprisoned for life would give an incentive for the operators of the prisons to treat their prisoners even worse so prisoners would choose to be executed.
Point about escaping/pardon. I acknowledge that society is ever so slightly safer when exceptionally dangerous criminals are executed.
About the risk of being pardoned by a malicious state, it’s true… But the other way could also be true that a malicious state can execute people who don’t deserve to be executed, like Snowden… Perhaps a compromise is to make particularly heinous crimes unpardonable? That would be a decent alternative to the death penalty, and it would be very difficult to repeal such a law.
As for escaping prison, it’s already rare that someone escapes from it. The solution is making better high security prisons for the most violent and dangerous criminals. I think it’s definitely possible to make escaping so difficult and dangerous that it wouldn’t be a problem. Make a prison on an island or an old oil rig, implants to track the prisoner’s location (a fancier version of the anti-theft tags in clothing stores), random X-rays to check they don’t have anything hidden in their bodies. All of these are definitely better than executing someone, though personally I think that maximum security prison breaks are already so rare it wouldn’t be worth it.
If the person goes to prison for the rest of their lives, it will keep society safe from them either way. The death penalty is not making society safer.
I think people like her deserve to spend the rest of their lives in prison, but no crime, no matter how severe, deserves a death penalty.
Being dyslexic is like a rollercoaster at times. I read it as “Donald Trump brutally shot down by judge”, did a double take, and had to immediately start over.
I never understood why people care so much for wireless charging. It’s less efficient, therefore you heat your device more which shortens the longevity of the battery, you charge slower, and if you move the device slightly, it won’t charge, therefore it’s less reliable (unless there is a magnet array like apple). Sure, it’s useful in a pinch, but is it really a make or break feature?
Trying to be a sage?
Oh that’s such a delicious irony… Also, letting a guy who was convicted of felony forgery become vice president of the republican party is so fitting for the party of election frauds.
With that said, I do think that prisoners should be allowed to vote as they are still citizens, even while in prison, let alone during their probation.
There is a study about this (link); many people would rather have less as long as their peers are worse off. This is our inner caveman brain telling us this is a zero sum world.
Republican voters subconsciously want the other side to suffer more than improving their situation, they are just not self-aware enough to realise it.
The smartphone market has matured, so there is less of a difference between each generation. Earlier on there was a massive difference in performance:
The OG Galaxy S had 512MB of RAM, 8GB storage, and a single Arm A8 core at 1GHz, and the SII had 1GB of RAM, 16GB/32GB storage, and a dual core A9 at 1.2GHz. This is a single generation with double the RAM and more than double CPU power, and nearly 6x the GPU power (theoretically), and 2-4 times the storage.
Then the SIII came out with a quad core SoC 1.4GHz, a much larger screen with higher resolution (jumping from 480p to 720p), significantly bigger battery, and up to 64GB of storage.
The S4 doubled the RAM to 2GB, faster storage, significantly faster and more efficient SoC, a larger, 1080p display paired with a much more powerful GPU, and a significantly larger battery as well.
Back then, if you had the money, there was a considerable difference between each generation and there was a reason to upgrade, many not every year, but if you could afford it, upgrading every other year made sense.
After that, changes were much more calm. Sure, some phone makers made exciting and innovative stuff, but the hardware didn’t have a massive difference from one generation to another, and also prices were rising.
Nowadays, phones are far less exciting, but flagship phones are ludicrously expensive, and yet they sell incredibly well. While phones are being improved from one generation to the next, they feel like small steps rather than a giant leap. Our demand for power hasn’t gone up quite as fast as our phones themselves. People will keep buying phones less frequently, just like we do for laptops.
I only used it to follow some artists I like, that’s it.
While an aggressive attitude won’t change the mind of bigots, a polite and respectful response to someone who advocates for forcing kids to go through the wrong puberty is going to be especially difficult for people with personal trauma for it, and it’s unreasonable to expect it of them.
I think it’s a reasonable reaction to throw polite discourse out when people use “moderate” as a cover for their bigotry. This is like when “moderate” person said that segregation of black people was reasonable when people were fighting for their civil rights, and that since the moderates weren’t pro-slavery so they were the good guys. No, you’re not the good guys, you’re just not as bad as the super evil guys. Congrats.
Now I won’t tell you to “fuck off and die”, but I will tell you to fuck off. If you were someone I personally knew, I would have put in the effort to be polite and try to educate you or whatever, but since we don’t know each other it’s unlikely to land.
I say it as someone who used to think like you.