I’d rather be punched in the mouth than wrongfully sentenced to 10 years in prison. Which is another way of saying I agree with tolerating some avoidable violent crime in return for a low probability of wrongful conviction.
-
-
-
But would you rather be punched in the mouth 30,000 times?
-
Well I only expect to live for 30,000 days. So I will say that being punched in the mouth once a day for my entire life would get tiresome. But I’d rather myself and 29,999 strangers get punched once and none of us are wrongfully convicted/sentenced.
-
Sure, its easily to volunteer strangers to get punched.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
There may be good reasons to avoid wrongful convictions other than individual justice. For example, in a country where the bar for evidence leading to conviction is low, one can expect the state to use criminal charges against political opponents.
-
Those would be wrongful convictions, right?
-
Right.
-
Are those wrongful convictions a worse problem than all the others?
-
It seems to me that yes.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
How could you tell by ratio alone what the perfect number would be? Isn't it conditional on the actual systems and processes involved? What if crime policy that decreases the ratio of wrongful convictions also decreases the overall crime rate? Or vice versa?
-
Just because we have got something low doesn't mean we're spending too much on it. There's only a few cases of polio for every million polio vaccinations, it doesn't mean we're spending too much money on polio vaccinations.
-
In the case of polio the cost of the vaccine is vastly less than the cost of getting polio. But in the case of violent crime, the harm of the crime is more comparable to the typical punishment for convicts.
-
The immediate cost savings of ending polio vaccination would be far higher than the cost of treating the few extra cases of polio. The point is you need to actually crunch the numbers, not assume something that sounds small is not worth spending on.
-
Punishing convicts doesn't achieve any goal. The goal is reducing crime. The evidence base for short-term prison sentences is weak at best at actually reducing lifetime crime of the criminal and it costs a huge amount of money.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
How can this possibly be? The total risk of being a victim of a crime shall be at least in the same order of magnitude as being convicted (both rightfully and wrongfully). I think they meant 1 in 30k chance of wrongful conviction out of all set of convictions
-
I think they mean 30K crimes to 1 wrongful conviction.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Sooo... We should be letting more innocent people go to jail? I'm sure that's not what you're saying..
-
Yes, that's what I'm saying.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.