Comments on: Odds of dying http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/ My Confined Space is an image blog with user submitted pictures of anything and everything, funny, serious or dark. Mon, 13 Feb 2012 16:07:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: iddqd http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/comment-page-1/#comment-70128 iddqd Tue, 09 Oct 2007 20:36:55 +0000 http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/#comment-70128 The internet, motherfucker. The internet, motherfucker.

]]> By: bigwibble6 http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/comment-page-1/#comment-69626 bigwibble6 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:08:02 +0000 http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/#comment-69626 In an attempt to steer the conversation away from gun control, does anyone know where this image comes from? In an attempt to steer the conversation away from gun control, does anyone know where this image comes from?

]]> By: colin http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/comment-page-1/#comment-69383 colin Sun, 07 Oct 2007 05:25:43 +0000 http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/#comment-69383 iddqd i agree entireley. i respect your boldness, have a medal. iddqd i agree entireley.
i respect your boldness, have a medal.

]]> By: iddqd http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/comment-page-1/#comment-69382 iddqd Sun, 07 Oct 2007 04:59:59 +0000 http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/#comment-69382 Caio, I hope someday a murderer will kill your entire family. I bet you can't wait to pay for his entitlement to free food and shelter for the rest of his life with your hard-earned tax dollars. GTFOff this planet. Caio,

I hope someday a murderer will kill your entire family. I bet you can’t wait to pay for his entitlement to free food and shelter for the rest of his life with your hard-earned tax dollars.

GTFOff this planet.

]]> By: Caio http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/comment-page-1/#comment-69372 Caio Sun, 07 Oct 2007 02:59:23 +0000 http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/#comment-69372 Iddq, I think it's hilarious it took you so few post to copy the pro-death penalty argument that I offered. I also find it funny that your version went so far beyond your vocabulary that it's quite likely copy and pasted. There's no such thing as an unbias statistic, and there are good arguments for the death penalty. It's a very contentions issue because, frankly, both options are bad and none of the data makes sense. Whatever North American and European statistics might tell us, India and Japan give us the exact opposite result. It's quite likely that violent crime correlates with all kinds of other factors which are so complex, it would be impossible to make a true statement about weather the death penalty does or does not affect the crime rate. The only way for this argument to continue, as causation is indeterminable, is to frame it in ethical terms (ie Do two wrongs make a right? Should we be spending our tax money to support killers, etc). But few people want to do that. They'd much rather insist on unverifiable "proofs" and copy and paste and such. Iddq, I think it’s hilarious it took you so few post to copy the pro-death penalty argument that I offered. I also find it funny that your version went so far beyond your vocabulary that it’s quite likely copy and pasted.

There’s no such thing as an unbias statistic, and there are good arguments for the death penalty. It’s a very contentions issue because, frankly, both options are bad and none of the data makes sense. Whatever North American and European statistics might tell us, India and Japan give us the exact opposite result. It’s quite likely that violent crime correlates with all kinds of other factors which are so complex, it would be impossible to make a true statement about weather the death penalty does or does not affect the crime rate.

The only way for this argument to continue, as causation is indeterminable, is to frame it in ethical terms (ie Do two wrongs make a right? Should we be spending our tax money to support killers, etc). But few people want to do that. They’d much rather insist on unverifiable “proofs” and copy and paste and such.

]]> By: iddqd http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/comment-page-1/#comment-69364 iddqd Sun, 07 Oct 2007 02:07:21 +0000 http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/#comment-69364 <a href="http://www.YouGotRickRolled.com" rel="nofollow">Proof that the death penalty lowers the crime rate.</a> Proof that the death penalty lowers the crime rate.

]]> By: reboot http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/comment-page-1/#comment-69311 reboot Sat, 06 Oct 2007 20:45:50 +0000 http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/#comment-69311 Point 1a: I've read "Freakonomics", but the argument that abortion causes lower crime rates is far, far from being universally accepted. At least read your own links before acting like you know everything. Point 1b: You're changing the topic, you've abandoned your original argument that "death penalty cause lower crime rates" and tried to argue for another cause for lower crime rates and provided links to support the new thesis rather than the original. Essentially you've conceded your original weak argument. Game. Set. Match. Point 2: Everyone knows cause and effect are difficult to determine. You ought to begin by showing some correlation between events then determine a casual link. You've done neither of these. Common sense is code for non-rigorous, unscientific thinking. Point 3: The benefit of incarcerating violent people has NOTHING to do with deterrence or justice. The point is to simply keep violent people away from the general public. Are you so willfully ignorant that you don't understand the point of having prisons? Point 1a: I’ve read “Freakonomics”, but the argument that abortion causes lower crime rates is far, far from being universally accepted. At least read your own links before acting like you know everything.
Point 1b: You’re changing the topic, you’ve abandoned your original argument that “death penalty cause lower crime rates” and tried to argue for another cause for lower crime rates and provided links to support the new thesis rather than the original. Essentially you’ve conceded your original weak argument. Game. Set. Match.
Point 2: Everyone knows cause and effect are difficult to determine. You ought to begin by showing some correlation between events then determine a casual link. You’ve done neither of these. Common sense is code for non-rigorous, unscientific thinking.
Point 3: The benefit of incarcerating violent people has NOTHING to do with deterrence or justice. The point is to simply keep violent people away from the general public. Are you so willfully ignorant that you don’t understand the point of having prisons?

]]> By: iddqd http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/comment-page-1/#comment-69302 iddqd Sat, 06 Oct 2007 19:44:58 +0000 http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/#comment-69302 First of all, the reason why there is a low crime rate now is mainly due to abortion. There will be some stupid right-wing and left-wing sites that will dispute otherwise, but I stand for the truth. http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=abortion+reduces+crime&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 Secondly, you have the problem of causation and effect. High crime rate in a state will usually have the death penalty. Now, did the death penalty cause the high crime rate, or did the high crime rate cause the death penalty being reinstated? Well...time to use your common sense. Thirdly, with your petty argument, let's go ahead and do away with the entire criminal system. No prisons, no jails, everybody is good, everything is good, nothing is bad. There is not such thing as crime. Welcome to the liberal's wet dream world. And the fact that Caio provided links to unreliable and biased sites does not make his argument stronger. I just provided you with a link to almost 2 million sites. I suppose that makes my argument a million times stronger than Caio's. First of all, the reason why there is a low crime rate now is mainly due to abortion. There will be some stupid right-wing and left-wing sites that will dispute otherwise, but I stand for the truth.

www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=abortion+reduces+crime&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

Secondly, you have the problem of causation and effect. High crime rate in a state will usually have the death penalty. Now, did the death penalty cause the high crime rate, or did the high crime rate cause the death penalty being reinstated? Well…time to use your common sense.

Thirdly, with your petty argument, let’s go ahead and do away with the entire criminal system. No prisons, no jails, everybody is good, everything is good, nothing is bad. There is not such thing as crime. Welcome to the liberal’s wet dream world.

And the fact that Caio provided links to unreliable and biased sites does not make his argument stronger. I just provided you with a link to almost 2 million sites. I suppose that makes my argument a million times stronger than Caio’s.

]]> By: reboot http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/comment-page-1/#comment-69280 reboot Sat, 06 Oct 2007 17:07:51 +0000 http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/#comment-69280 iddqd: Caio at least provided some links to statistics, you should do the same if you don't want to sound like a raving lunatic. Also you're "criminal logic" is laughable. There are two times of murder cases: 1)"Crime of Passion" The murderer is emotionally overwhelmed and acts without regard to consequences, therefore deterrents are irrelevant. 2)"Premeditated" The murdered has planned out the crime to such a degree that he does not believe that he is likely to be caught. Why worry about the sentence if you don't think that you are going to get caught? Here are some unbiased statistics for you http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=12&did=169 Whether or not there is a death penalty is almost inconsequential to crime rates. Its entirely a moral question. iddqd: Caio at least provided some links to statistics, you should do the same if you don’t want to sound like a raving lunatic. Also you’re “criminal logic” is laughable.
There are two times of murder cases:
1)”Crime of Passion” The murderer is emotionally overwhelmed and acts without regard to consequences, therefore deterrents are irrelevant.
2)”Premeditated” The murdered has planned out the crime to such a degree that he does not believe that he is likely to be caught. Why worry about the sentence if you don’t think that you are going to get caught?
Here are some unbiased statistics for you
www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=12&did=169
Whether or not there is a death penalty is almost inconsequential to crime rates. Its entirely a moral question.

]]> By: iddqd http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/comment-page-1/#comment-69273 iddqd Sat, 06 Oct 2007 16:31:08 +0000 http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/10/05/odds-of-dying/#comment-69273 <b>Caio</b>: Yeah, because some Earthlink page is a <em>good reliable</em> source of information. Not to mention, citing Amnesty International as a source (which is an organization that <b>opposes</b> the death penalty) is going to give an <em>unbiased</em> report on the death penalty. I already did my Googling, but you know what, my argument is enough to prove my point. So until you say my argument is either invalid or unsound, I stand corrected. - A person wants to commit homicide. - If the deterrant is high enough, he will not commit homicide. - Being put to death by the state is worse than receiving free food and shelter for the rest of his life - Therefore, the death penality is an effective deterrant against crime There are more than enough studies to prove my obvious point. It's really a matter of common sense vs. liberal stupidity and irrationality. Caio:

Yeah, because some Earthlink page is a good reliable source of information. Not to mention, citing Amnesty International as a source (which is an organization that opposes the death penalty) is going to give an unbiased report on the death penalty.

I already did my Googling, but you know what, my argument is enough to prove my point. So until you say my argument is either invalid or unsound, I stand corrected.

- A person wants to commit homicide.
- If the deterrant is high enough, he will not commit homicide.
- Being put to death by the state is worse than receiving free food and shelter for the rest of his life
- Therefore, the death penality is an effective deterrant against crime

There are more than enough studies to prove my obvious point. It’s really a matter of common sense vs. liberal stupidity and irrationality.

]]>