4 ms·

Because the actions that lead to death penalties are usually committed without a calm and collected risk-benefit analysis, whereas economic decisions of a corpo

Because the actions that lead to death penalties are usually committed without a calm and collected risk-benefit analysis, whereas economic decisions of a corporation absolutely are.

thunky 2y ago
> the actions that lead to death penalties are usually committed without a calm and collected risk-benefit analysis Really? I thought death penalty is typically reserved for premeditated acts where the criminal did actually think it through.
- paulcole 2y ago
  > where the criminal did actually think it through Until we can get into the criminal's brain we can't know the extent to which they thought it through. We're just basically saying, "Anybody would know that they shouldn't kill somebody and it seems like they probably thought about killing this person before they did it." I doubt there's going to be a stat that satisfies you here, but this one is interesting: https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/murder-rates/murder-rate-of-death-penalty-states-compared-to-non-death-penalty-states https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/murder-rates... I haven't ever seen non-anecdotal evidence (flimsy or otherwise) that makes me think the death penalty acts as a deterrent.
  - thunky 2y ago
    > Until we can get into the criminal's brain we can't know the extent to which they thought it through. Sure we can, based on their actions. For example, we know that the guy that killed 60 people in Vegas planned it out ahead of time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting#Preparation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting#Prepar.... I'm not the one saying that the penalty works as a deterrent. It probably didn't in this case since the guy killed himself. Although he may have preferred death to a life in prison.
    - paulcole 2y ago
      Congrats on picking the most extreme example possible. What about a situation where someone kills their wife after work one day? How will you know if he had thought about it for a while or just snapped? Obviously you will look at the evidence and see if there was clear evidence of planning or not. But if there's not how can you be confident in whether it was planned? > I'm not the one saying that the penalty works as a deterrent. Good, because it doesn't.
      - thunky 2y ago
        I never said we know in every instance. And the death penalty isn't applied in every instance either. > What about a situation where someone kills their wife after work one day? > Obviously you will look at the evidence and see if there was clear evidence of planning or not Right, and in this court can choose not to execute him based on this uncertainty.
- consteval 2y ago
  Theoretically. In practice it's reserved for the unfortunate souls who happen to be born in the most racist parts of the US with the most tough-on-crime attitudes and corrupt policing. And then some of them are just innocent, too. The problem with death is you can't undo it. If you mess up, including systemic mess ups, it's over.

Because the actions that lead to death penalties are usually committed without a calm and collected risk-benefit analysis, whereas economic decisions of a corporation absolutely are.

thunky 2y ago

> the actions that lead to death penalties are usually committed without a calm and collected risk-benefit analysis Really? I thought death penalty is typically reserved for premeditated acts where the criminal did actually think it through.

paulcole 2y ago
> where the criminal did actually think it through Until we can get into the criminal's brain we can't know the extent to which they thought it through. We're just basically saying, "Anybody would know that they shouldn't kill somebody and it seems like they probably thought about killing this person before they did it." I doubt there's going to be a stat that satisfies you here, but this one is interesting: https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/murder-rates/murder-rate-of-death-penalty-states-compared-to-non-death-penalty-states https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/murder-rates... I haven't ever seen non-anecdotal evidence (flimsy or otherwise) that makes me think the death penalty acts as a deterrent.
- thunky 2y ago
  > Until we can get into the criminal's brain we can't know the extent to which they thought it through. Sure we can, based on their actions. For example, we know that the guy that killed 60 people in Vegas planned it out ahead of time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting#Preparation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting#Prepar.... I'm not the one saying that the penalty works as a deterrent. It probably didn't in this case since the guy killed himself. Although he may have preferred death to a life in prison.
  - paulcole 2y ago
    Congrats on picking the most extreme example possible. What about a situation where someone kills their wife after work one day? How will you know if he had thought about it for a while or just snapped? Obviously you will look at the evidence and see if there was clear evidence of planning or not. But if there's not how can you be confident in whether it was planned? > I'm not the one saying that the penalty works as a deterrent. Good, because it doesn't.
    - thunky 2y ago
      I never said we know in every instance. And the death penalty isn't applied in every instance either. > What about a situation where someone kills their wife after work one day? > Obviously you will look at the evidence and see if there was clear evidence of planning or not Right, and in this court can choose not to execute him based on this uncertainty.
consteval 2y ago
Theoretically. In practice it's reserved for the unfortunate souls who happen to be born in the most racist parts of the US with the most tough-on-crime attitudes and corrupt policing. And then some of them are just innocent, too. The problem with death is you can't undo it. If you mess up, including systemic mess ups, it's over.