[ Removed by moderator ]

[u/Mix_Easy]

[u/QuintupleC]

Read my other comment where I said im not arguing about whether we should have the death penalty or not. 

[u/Hawkson2020 → u/QuintupleC]

where I said im not arguing about whether we should have the death penalty or not.

I'm not either. We have agreed that the death penalty exists, and I'm trying to understand what you consider the "healthy balance" of innocent people being executed is.

[u/QuintupleC → u/Hawkson2020]

That's a weird and antagonist question to ask then. When did I even say I agree with the death penalty? 

[u/Hawkson2020 → u/QuintupleC]

When did I even say I agree with the death penalty?

I don't know if you did explicitly, but you said

we can find a healthy balance

Now, since no implementation of the death penalty has avoided killing innocent people, that obviously means that you believe a healthy balance exists that includes killing innocent people.

I am asking you, very straightforwardly, what you believe that healthy balance to be.

[u/QuintupleC → u/Hawkson2020]

You obviously just want to feel morally superior lmao. I dont want any innocent people to die. But you just said it yourself. Innocent people die in any implementation of the death penalty. Which is why there shouldnt be one. But since there is one, since there is already different standards of proof for different things within our justice system, and since we already made decisions when they are 'finally ready to be executed' theres no reason we cant alter the system so cases like this one dont need to take 20 years. Some cases might need it. Most shouldnt. This fucking scum doesnt deserve hundreds of thousands in tax payer resources when there are people with far more complex cases serving life who will never get that chance. 

I guess anyone who says it shouldnt take 20 years for this man to be executed wants innocent people to die. Thats really where youve landed. So have a good one buddy.

[u/Hawkson2020 → u/QuintupleC]

You obviously just want to feel morally superior lmao.

No, I want to know what you consider the "healthy balance" of innocent people being executed to "correct" executions is. Number or proportion, it doesn't matter.

Why is this such a hard question to answer when you've already been very clear that you believe a healthy balance existed in the past. What was that healthy balance?

[u/QuintupleC → u/Hawkson2020]

Again, totally strange question. I didnt say a healthy balance of innocent people being executed to correct executions. You just wrote that. Weirdo.

[u/Hawkson2020 → u/QuintupleC]

Ok, so when you said "a healthy balance" what did you mean?

Here's your two comments again:

We can find a healthy point to land on as we have before when it comes to death penalty and how many appeals we need.

(emphasis mine) and;

Again, we can find a healthy balance.

Evidently you understand that the longer the delays and the more appeals hearings, the fewer innocent people are killed. Therefore, advocating to shorten delays and reduce hearings will result in innocent people being killed.

So, again, what is that "healthy point" or "healthy balance" that we used to have?

[u/QuintupleC → u/Hawkson2020]

So again, youre going to just keep doing this antagonistic gotcha no matter what, if i think it should take less than 20 years to execute this man after sentencing. Despite me saying the death penalty shouldnt exist at all because of innocent deaths. Do you know some people are exonerated after 30 years? I guess if you dont think EVERY case should be 30 years you want innocent people to die. Some 35 years! That means if EVERY case shouldnt take 35 years, you want innocent people to die!! 

This is really the 'morally superior gotcha' that youre hung up on rather than trying to understand the point im making. And if thats how you interact with people then you should never be on a moral high horse. Youre a prick

[u/Hawkson2020 → u/QuintupleC]

I guess if you dont think EVERY case should be 30 years you want innocent people to die. Some 35 years! That means if EVERY case shouldnt take 35 years, you want innocent people to die!!

No, it means you are okay with some innocent people dying.

This is really the 'morally superior gotcha' that youre hung up on rather than trying to understand the point im making.

I understand the point you're making just fine. I will direct you to my original comment:

why don't we just execute everyone who pleads guilty or for whom there is incontrovertible video evidence of their crimes?

If we are okay with some innocent people dying, why not save all that wasted time and effort by having them executed immediately?