Hard to imagine this is science. If we want to ensure the guilty do not repeat, wouldn't killing them immediately not guarantee a recidivism rate of 0%? Unless you believe in reincarnation or ghosts at least it has a real mathematical basis.
It may be subjective, but I don't think recidivism rate is so important that you would kill people who may not reoffend, or really might not be guilty in the first place. Personally I would prefer that at least in the case of non-violent crimes, it is better to parole almost everyone to reduce the suffering of innocents.
I also found the following quote weird because the article states people are worse at predictions and more biased than statistics:
> “You mean to tell me they’re using statistics to determine what’s going to happen to me?” he asked. “That ain’t right.”
4 comments
[ 4.3 ms ] story [ 19.9 ms ] threadI also found the following quote weird because the article states people are worse at predictions and more biased than statistics:
> “You mean to tell me they’re using statistics to determine what’s going to happen to me?” he asked. “That ain’t right.”