The unimportant news thread

[Karl Henning]

An area where people have strong feelings, which makes things complicated.

Parenthetically, as we are finding in the recent St Louis affair.

[mc ukrneal]

I can give you a name to start googling with. Ehrlich.
An area where people have strong feelings, which makes things complicated. The most important thing is that the death penalty has little effect, but actual executions do seem to. At least at first.  I am pretty convinced that in situations when the death penalty is rarely applied then actually applying it has a noticeable deterrent effect. Less clear to me what happens after it is routine and no longer has the same shock value. That complicates analysis too. In any case the analysis is way better than it was 40 years ago.

But his findings are not widely agreed upon. There are many who claim his findings are wrong, his evidence/method flawed, conclusions erroneous, etc. They back their ideas  with evidence and statistics, which are in turn questioned/ridiculed, and the circle goes on.

Is the analysis better? I am not so sure - it is more sophisticated.

[Ken B]

But his findings are not widely agreed upon. There are many who claim his findings are wrong, his evidence/method flawed, conclusions erroneous, etc. They back their ideas  with evidence and statistics, which are in turn questioned/ridiculed, and the circle goes on.

Is the analysis better? I am not so sure - it is more sophisticated.

Indeed. But all I said was this: "There is quite good evidence now that the death penalty has a strong deterrent effect. " And I think that is a true statement. There is quite good evidence. That is not the same thing as slam-dunk evidence, not the same thing as conclusive proof. But the claim that I made back in the seventies, that there is no evidence for deterrence, is false. There is now.

It's not just Ehrlich. His study in the 70s was the first one to credibly argue there is an effect, and so is the famous one, but his is by no means the only study to do so. There have been a number in the past 20 years. Some are discussed here. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/11/AR2007061100406.html

[mc ukrneal]

Indeed. But all I said was this: "There is quite good evidence now that the death penalty has a strong deterrent effect. " And I think that is a true statement. There is quite good evidence. That is not the same thing as slam-dunk evidence, not the same thing as conclusive proof. But the claim that I made back in the seventies, that there is no evidence for deterrence, is false. There is now.

It's not just Ehrlich. His study in the 70s was the first one to credibly argue there is an effect, and so is the famous one, but his is by no means the only study to do so. There have been a number in the past 20 years. Some are discussed here. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/11/AR2007061100406.html

I don't think it is good evidence, so I do not agree. And for every study that claims deterrance there is another that claims otherwise. For example, one can find many references to various studies here: http://www.religioustolerance.org/execut4.htm

Personally, I don't feel this is the main argument over the issue, but neither am I inclined to agree that it provides deterrance.

[Ken B]

I don't think it is good evidence, so I do not agree.

Rather, you do not agree so you do not think it is good evidence.

[NorthNYMark]

Rather, you do not agree so you do not think it is good evidence.

Rather, he does not agree with you, so it must be due to his bias rather than his analysis of the evidence, whereas your claim that there is "good" evidence for something is obviously based in nothing but objectivity.

[Ken B]

Rather, he does not agree with you, so it must be due to his bias rather than his analysis of the evidence, whereas your claim that there is "good" evidence for something is obviously based in nothing but objectivity.

That must be it. It cannot possibly be that dozens of peer reviewed journal articles counts as evidence. I don't say it proves the case, only that by any reasonable standard it counts as evidence.

As for agreeing with me? You seem to be making the elementary mistake of assuming I agree with Ehrlich simply because I say he has a case.  Here is a page from years ago where I dispute if it really means what it says. I think it relies on some plausible but strong assumptions. http://www.thebigquestions.com/2010/11/11/reasoning-about-whats-reasonable/

I fought Landsburg over several blogposts on this issue actually.

[ibanezmonster]

https://www.youtube.com/v/vGvXN56t6Wo#t=800

I actually took time out of my anime watching to watch a lot of this (too hard to read subs and do homework at the same time).

[mc ukrneal]

Rather, you do not agree so you do not think it is good evidence.

No. Rather, the basis for the conclusions is flawed. A casual search of the subject will show the issues involved. Just as an example: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/FaganTestimony.pdf. I don't agree with every word, but I think you'll get the idea.

[Ken B]

No. Rather, the basis for the conclusions is flawed. A casual search of the subject will show the issues involved. Just as an example: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/FaganTestimony.pdf. I don't agree with every word, but I think you'll get the idea.

OK. It just felt to me you were being a bit flippant about evidence opposed to your views. I see far too much of that stuff. If you weren't, I apologize for assuming the worst. 

Would you agree with rather than 'good' or 'quite good', the phrase 'pertinent and serious' ?
The point I am making is that the deterrence-works faction actually has a serious argument now (and I suspect they are correct to at least some extent), whereas once they really did not. There are Nobel prize winners and quite serious thinkers who accept these results but still oppose the death penalty (Becker and Sunstein are examples.)

[Cosi bel do]

I'd like to understand I one can seriously pretend that death penalty acts as a deterrent.

In the US, States without the death penalty have had consistently lower murder rates, and the percent difference actually seems to widen dramatically with time.

The same goes for comparison between countries, for instance murder rates in OECD countries : 2 thirds of the 9 first countries use death penalty, while only one of the other 27 do (Japan).

The deterrent effect of death penalty is a myth, and correlation between death penalty and murder rates actually goes the other way...

[Florestan]

The deterrent effect of death penalty is a myth, and correlation between death penalty and murder rates actually goes the other way...

That the death penalty is not much of a deterrent may or may not be true, but you seem to imply that it is actually an encouragement...

[Todd]

Paper tiger mauls one.

[North Star]

Woman to sue Peppa Pig creators after sharing name with baby goat character -  Businesswoman Gabriella Capra says her life has 'become an animated cartoon' after her namesake featured in the children's show

[ibanezmonster]

Woman to sue Peppa Pig creators after sharing name with baby goat character -  Businesswoman Gabriella Capra says her life has 'become an animated cartoon' after her namesake featured in the children's show

First name only? Guess we should remove all names that are being used for real people from every work of fiction.

[North Star]

First name only? Guess we should remove all names that are being used for real people from every work of fiction.

Capra means 'goat'. 

[ibanezmonster]

Let me be evil for a minute and share a picture I found that may enrage some people, relating to a certain topic in this thread... 



Just kidding. That's not evil. But sadly, some people think setting the same standards for everyone is evil. Lol. 

[ibanezmonster]

So that Bosnian American guy who died Cannibal Corpse style... there's protests, but I don't see people burning their city down over it. 

So that led me to this site called everydayfeminism which has articles about "white privilege" and "rape culture."
Needless to say, if you are a thinking human being with a brain, you'll be overwhelmed at the bullshit, cherry picked statistics and completely irrelevant points to support an agenda.

I thought Conservative thinking was profoundly stupid and now I'm starting to understand Liberal thinking. I'm not sure which is stupider. I really hope people see through the bullshit, regardless of how they align theirselves.

[Ken B]

Put'em up, scumbag!
http://reason.com/blog/2014/12/02/four-members-of-congress-put-their-hands

[ibanezmonster]

Put'em up, scumbag!
http://reason.com/blog/2014/12/02/four-members-of-congress-put-their-hands

The headline:
"Four Members of Congress Put Their Hands Up in Solidarity With Ferguson Protesters, None Voted to Limit Police Militarization"

Lol.

I saw a guy walking around with his hands up outside before going to the gym... and he was still doing that when I drove home. The irony being that supposedly Michael Brown never even had his hands up.

What is it, 6 corporations that control 90% of the media? Makes you wonder sometimes if the extensive coverage is done to intentionally divide people, keeping them distracted from what is really going on. And of course mainly try to provoke the people that are most susceptible to being provoked is how you divide and conquer.