Question For Death Penalty Opponents

[m1illion]

The death penalty, as a sentence from a court of law, is never acceptable.
An individual intent on my demise will result in my making every effort to kill them first.
Pretty simple.

[Girchuck]

There is an unspoken assumption in this question that may or may not be correct.
The assumption is that the number of capital crimes (however they are defined) per capita will remain unchanged on average and the number x will have a very weak or no dependence on time.
The other assumption is that there is no slippery slope in this proposal, i.e. once the number is reduced to x there will be no future proposals to reduce it to y smaller than x, leading eventually to a gradual asymptotic approach to a total ban without actually declaring a total ban.
Do you want to clarify if these assumptions are accurate?

[John Cole]

David, yes, I did get the question and the part about the effect of applying limited circumstances. I am opposed to the death penalty, and the idea that it will be in place forever, albeit applied only in limited circumstances, does not appeal to me. For the same reason, Pro-lifers, and let's include the ardent who view stem cell research as abortion, would oppose allowing abortions for one-armed acrobats in the first trimester.

BTW, as Bluffthis mentions, 70% of Americans favor a woman's right to choose but are also against abortion as a method of birth control. The other 30% are about equally divided between those who oppose abortion and those who favor abortion in any circumstances and for any reson. Yet, all we ever seem to hear from are the 15% who convince us the country is completely polarized on the issue.

[David Sklansky]

Give me a number dammit.

[goofball]

Assuming the effect lasts for the rest of my life, I'll say 18

[David Sklansky]

"Do you want to clarify if these assumptions are accurate?"

Yes they are. Now give me a number.

[John Cole]

LOL. Okay, Okay. Based on my previous post, x=15.

x=0

At some point, there will be no death penalty in this country. So, any x>0 will eventually result in more executions than simply waiting for the inevitable. (Given your condition that a reduction now eliminates any chance of an end to the death penalty in the future.)

I imagine this question has something to do with abortion. But, I don't think there is a strong connection. I don't really care what happens to someone who has committed a crime which qualifies for the death penalty. My problem with the death penalty is that it is killing carried out by the state.

Abortion differs in two important ways (for me): I might actually care what happens to a fetus; and the state is not the entity carrying out the action.

[David Sklansky]

I should have said that enacting the legislation would keep the death penalty in existence for a specified length of time. Say forty years.

[adios]

x == 0

Still don't want to put to death a possibly innocent person.

There is a possibility that the person executed may be innocent right or did I read the question incorrectly?