I absolutely agree with you in the first point, but I think there are cases where person really doesn’t have the capacity, or we don’t want to try it. I think of mass murderers or child murderers or something like that. People who are going to spend their whole life in jail with life-sentence with no way of ever getting out and who cost the state money and are the reason why some people want death sentence back in my country for example. The first point still applies however and there are cases of people getting out of jail after ten or fifteen years when new evidence is discovered.
The system isn’t infallible. There’s always a small (but non-zero) chance that they put an innocent person to death. There are multiple records of people being put to death and later being found innocent.
That’s enough justification for me to abolish the death penalty.
Good. Much like malls, big cities are a thing of the past. People don’t want that anymore, cities are hell to travel around, dirty, stinky, expensive and unsustainable. Most people would have a vastly better time in a well developed small/mid town area.
Plastic recycling as a way of reducing waste or emissions is not remotely viable. The one thing it is viable for is greenwashing: giving the impression that, because plastic recycling exists, there’s no need to reduce use of plastic.
While I agree I don’t think we should stop trying to find new/better ways to recycle things. Just because it’s not viable with current tech doesn’t mean it should be abandoned. Maybe right now some overworked grad student is about to make a major breakthrough. It’s going to take lots of people (far smarter than I) and numerous approaches to try and reign in the fast approaching climate disaster.
Yeah, nothing but respect for Lego here. Tried it, proved it wasn’t viable, chose not to do it just for the PR, and set back out to continue looking for something that actually works.
If Newsom is going to tax guns let it be on handguns and Ar-15 style weapons since they are primarily used in attacks and mass shootings. Most sportsmen, and the general public will be more tolerate of this. Gong too far will cost too much political capital.
I love how "BuT tHeN tHeY wIlL jUsT uSe KnIvEs" rhetoric gets abandoned and a whole new more sophisticated ability to negotiate shows up AFTER effective action is taken.
This is interesting, and I personally feel he is fighting it only because it buys him more time. In a different article (linked in this one), where they announce Alabama’s plan to use nitrogen it says:
Smith, in seeking to block the state’s second attempt to execute him by lethal injection, had argued that nitrogen should be available.
So he literally asked to use nitrogen, they said “ok” and now’s he’s saying “how dare you try to use me as a guinea pig”
The correct analogy would be you refusing to get out of a fighter jet except via ejection seats, them refusing to be ejected lol. This guy apparently wasn’t saying it should be available in general but that it should be an option for him.
This guy is apparently saying that he wants to know how they are planning to use nitrogen gas, and the state is refusing to tell him.
So the correct analogy would be you refusing to get out of a fighter jet except via ejection seats. Then someone says, “Okay you can get out via ‘ejection seats’, happy now?”. Then you say, “Hey what’s up with the air quotes around ‘ejection seats’? What kind of ejection are you planning anyway? How does this thing work?”. Then they say, “Don’t you worry about the details buddy. You’ll be ‘ejected’ from your ‘seat’, LOL! Now shut up and get in the plane”.
If you think his inconsistent argument is ridiculous, you don’t understand the legal system. It’s okay, that’s why there are lawyers. (1) Alternate pleading is a thing, (2) the State pulls the same shit except 1000% worse, (3) the judiciary, especially the GOP judiciary that is elected on a “tough on crime” platform (got to love politicized justice), is ABSOLUTELY the most inconsistent, as their goal is to accept any argument of the State that leads to speedy execution. It goes all the way up to the SCOTUS - former Chief Justice Rehnquist was absolutely a shining star of the death machine, regardless of actual innocence. EDIT: the thing that really pisses me off is when the media covers alternate pleading without context. It’s terribly biased reporting designed to give people justice boners and pump up support for the State. EDIT2: I might be slightly off with my terms of art - I’m in transactional law, not criminal law, and it’s been a hell of a long time since law school or anything involving criminal law beyond a traffic ticket.
Keep denying justice to people and they will start to take it upon themselves to see it done. I personally don’t want to see lynch mobs, but if a few pigs have to swing for them to get the message they brought it on themselves
news
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.