TIL two teenagers were found dead in Mexico after they had unknowingly bullied the son of a cartel member at their high school.

Define why you believe that a state has the right to decide this.

Because they currently have that right. This is why I believe they have the right to do this. Its a simple question. I gave you a fucking simple answer. How are you struggling with this? I gave an example not to explain law and order but to explain how someone granted a power can act on it. How if I had a problem with this I know how I'd go about changing it. The state has been granted this power, that's why I believe they can act on it. Am I wrong ?? If you didn't get the answer you were looking for its because you asked the wrong question.

I brought up physics because you're talking about wanting something that's 100% (amazed you can claim you aren't talking about certainty whilst throwing out that figure - pretty sure you ain't no physicist) .. anyhoo I just spent the majority of my afternoon calculating errors and significant figures and it was on my mind. Also, fuck you're a cockhead. See that has nothing to do with the argument either but it was on my mind and I figured I'd include it. It's reddit, we aren't at Toastmasters.

I'm talking about video/dna/gps tracking data, eye witnesses on a multitude of crimes that sum up to multiple multiple homicides. For what I'm picturing I can't really think of a single person that would yet have qualified for execution. Give law enforcement and technology a little time and consider the fact that someone meeting this high standard will almost never be found and I think that's a good solution.

Lets say someone a century meets the standard. Now picture 1 in 10,000 of these people (because its an incredibly high standard this is actually a very low estimate), and you'll need to wait maybe 50,000 years before someone fucks up. Oh no, how could I live with that on my conscience. Easily. I'm not a massive pussy.

You want a moratorium until it is absolute. That's just a dishonest way of saying you want it banned outright. I'd say, change the criteria. It's bullshit people get done for single homicides. Make it a dozen and I can't see why you can't work with that. How many innocent people get charged and convicted of more than 10 individual homicides? Can you name any? Separate acts, all with an enormous amount of proof? Do you really think someone meeting this criteria would honestly turn up innocent? Would you really stick to your 4% figure here ??

What's your justification for removing the right of the state to execute people. So far you've listed Money (bullshit), Innocent people (which I believe this can and is being overcome), that other people have abolished it (pointless).

Why do I believe some people lose the right to live. Because some people do some truly fucking horrible shit and at some point I believe that should invalid one's right to continue living. I also believe in euthanasia, so I don't see why someone should be denied the option to be put down by the state. The "life is precious we must protect it" argument is bullshit. Some people need to be wiped out and some people want to be. I don't see the harm in trying to setup a structure in which this works.

You see a problem, stop the whole thing. That's retarded.

/r/todayilearned Thread Parent Link - translate.google.com