Bizarre car murder

“"I guess that depends on whether or not you are the innocent convict, FG."
Phaedrus
09:43:40 AM
06/28/03

Dang, Phaedrus, that's the obvious non-answer. I expected something far more thoughtful from you.”

“Thoughtful would be understanding what I meant by it.

If society believes it is okay to kill innocent citizens in a certain percentage of cases, in order to assure the death of the guilty, then it is preferable to do so.

You might not think so, however if you're among that small percentage of innocents.”

“By the way, I'd say this applies as well in this debate as any other:

A liberal will let a few people cheat the system
to make sure that nobody goes hungry.

A conservative will let a few people go hungry to
make sure nobody cheats the system.”

“Well, since I'm obviously far to dim to understand you, are you saying that it is preferable to release the sociopath who will most assuredly prey upon more innocent people, thus causing far more damage than the loss of just one innocent life? Actually, I posed the question more as a judgement of our legal system with its myriad loopholes...”

“BTW, I don't belive that the idea is so much to assure the death of the guilty as much as the safety of innocents.”

“If those are my only two options, FG, then I would say it is preferable to live under a government that does not kill the innocent. If that means being more at danger from bad people, then so be it.

If I had more than one choice, I would say it is preferable to detain an innocent man than to allow a sociopath to go free. An innocent man can be given his freedom back, but not his life.”

“I agree that killing the innocent sucks. How about killing the guilty?

Let's expand this...how about rules of evidence? Should illegally obtained evidence be allowed in testimony? After all, the truth is what we're after, isn't it? Should judges, attorneys, law officers and juries be held at least partially responsible for the results of their actions?”