DNA evidence is also a lot less bulletproof than a lot of people (and juries) think: false positives do happen, and when they do they happen to people whose DNA is already in the police system for whatever reason - usually because they've been previously arrested. It's really difficult to convince a jury of a false positive, or to get people to think about the fact that if police disproportionately stop and arrest, say, black people, they will be much more likely to get misidentified by the DNA evidence.
Definitely. I’m in undergrad forensic psych right now, but fortunate enough to work with folks who are doing amazing research in this area (stuff coming out of UNSW right now is absolutely brilliant) and in particular on how juries interpret forensic evidence. It’s scary, both how unreliable the majority of forensic evidence is, and how much juries trust it. We’ve got a long way to go in terms of gatekeeping the quality of forensic evidence that makes it into courtrooms, and changing the public perception of forensic evidence as ‘scientifically infallible,’ to start addressing the issue of juries falsely convicting based on poor-quality forensic evidence. It’s depressing stuff.
@⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ Too bad red states already do that when they vote in people like Trump. Nice victim blaming for drug addicts though. Muh states rights
People in prison usually aren't actively harmed by agents of the prison; they just suffer from preventable suffering at the hands of isolation, illness, fellow inmates, etc. This is exactly how conservatives propose the government should care for its citizens, so you have to recognize the ideological consistency.
@@timothymclean agents of prisons do actively harm prisoners. They antagonize, plant contraband, torture (segregated confinement especially), sell drugs, etc. U.S. prisons have guards that are sometimes just as bad, if not worse than some of the prisoners.
@@TheAgent0060 I'm not sure what fraction of inmates actually suffer that...which is a weak justification for my joke at the expense of conservative governments. (Though to be fair, in practice conservative governments/institutions _do_ do/have done everything you said, more or more often than liberal ones.)
@⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ call me malicious then. I'd pick anyone out of any prison in the world as more deserving of care than you.
"I bet if your wife/daughter was murdered, you'd want them dead" Of course I would. In the heat of the moment, I wouldn't call the police because I would want to torture them for as long as possible. But what does it say about your position that I'd have to be severely emotionally compromised to agree with it?
Seriously. Not to mention I’m one flawed human. Shouldn’t the justice system aspire to more than that? There’s a reason I wouldn’t be allowed to prosecute my wife’s killer, or be the judge or sit on the jury.
Its a thing down here in a south that prisoners are being treated way to good and that we need to do as much as we can to make prisoners lives hell because then they won't want to go to prison and won't commit crimes. Edit: I keep getting replies about how this is wrong. Yes this is wrong. This is immoral and is not the way prisons should work. In my opinion every person should have every option to be reformed and if they can not be then prison should not be a punishment but rather a place to reform and if that fails to hold those who can't reenter the society in a humain and just place with no illwill for we are all human.
@@ramblingsofadash5159 All that is an argument for torture and abuse by state authorities. Who do you want to give that power to? Oh right the same government you say is to big, corrupt and untrustworthy.
@@greatandmightykevin In theory, if you make prison such a hellish experience, then shouldn't it reduce recidivism as well as deter any would be offenders? However, in practice, this doesn't work one bit. The prisons are hellish enough to dehumanise the inmates, but they are not Nazi concentration camp levels of horrendous. For this to work, one would need to make prison so awful that convicts would prefer a bullet to the back of the head rather than be incarcerated there. However, I don't think that any sane person would ever want to actually implement such a system, because it would be grossly injurious to society as a whole. Think about the types of people you would have staffing such a prison... or the types of people who would want to work there. These aren't people whom you want to be numerous in your community! That said, an intelligent approach would be to spend more on rehabilitating former prisoners--and to help them find gainful employment after serving out their sentences. The idea of harsh prisons deterring would-be offenders is absurd since the people who are deterred by current prisons _are not likely to commit crimes anyway_. Most criminals don't plan on being caught, and for them, crime does pay (until they are caught).
Thats because propagandists like him will change their arguments and their descriptions about the exact same things just to fit the narrative they are peddling.
I lost my Dad to reckless vehicular homicide. In the immediate aftermath I was raging with grief and anger. If you had put the young person responsible within my reach in those moments I cannot guarantee I would have contained myself. I imagine that pain would be dialed to 11 in the case of first or second degree murder, Which makes what Prager is doing so appalling to me. He’s drafting grieving survivors into his argument, using our grief as borrowed ammunition and our pain as rhetorical armor. He asked death penalty opponents to put themselves in our shoes without ever asking us whether we are still using them.
I got hit by a motorcycle once, as much as I want to kill that guy, I don't think killing literally everyone is a good thing. To quote Batman: It always starts with one, that is the justification that everyone always use.
Exactly. They think the death penalty provides “closure” of some kind. It’s nothing but another grift. “Closure” doesn’t exist, but there sure are a lot of people who try to sell it to those who are hurting 😔
Gacy "the killer clown" did not beg for death penalty, he claimed innocence till death, feigning insanity along other things and his last words were "kiss my ass". Peterson is very incorrect.
Yeah, he was thinking of Ed Kemper who requested the death penalty. Ed Kemper is also one of 4 US serial killers that turned themselves in while admitting regret (to varying degrees) about what they've done. Ed Kemper, Wayne Adam Ford, Mack Ray Edwards, and Ricardo Silvio Caputo. Mack Ray Edwards also requested the death penalty, complained about the wait being too long, and killed himself soon after conviction. I think he would've been more fitting for Peterson's nonsense argument.
@@tilltronje1623 I mean, I think he is correct that the state shouldn't be granted the power to execute people. But I agree with your sentiment though... I don't think he's right about much.
Summary: 1. You can mistakenly kill innocents. 2. It's more costly than prison for life. 3. It doesn't even provide closure to most relatives of the victims.
5. It prevents criminal rehabilitation 6. Saved money from less expensive lifetime imprisonment can go to many other better programs 7. The state executing prisoners has a slippery slope when protesters can be arrested.
@@cibo889 the cost for the lawyers, execution style, pay for the officers who kill the person, and the resulting clean up costs around $3 million per death. Compre that with holding that same person alive for their entire life in a prison to say, 85 years old, and thats at most $1-2 million considering medical bills
Not going to lie, despite being pro death penalty(still am, mostly due to the fact that I come from a country that uses the death penalty, and has managed to maintain Low crime rates in it), I found Prager’s argument really idiotic Like sure science can lead to finding the culprit but it’s not a hundred 100% guarantee, it’s a high chance of success not a perfect chance of success Furthermore, the death of a person should not be given out so easily either, the reason the death penalty is called Capital Punishment is because it’s supposed to be the most severe sentence a person can receive, which means it should be reserved for cases which are the most severe, and the most extreme I wouldn’t call the death penalty morally good, but it’s a (usually) good deterrent of crime But once again, the death penalty causes a lot of collateral damage and problems which is why i believe it should only be used in situations whereby it concerns the order of the country All in all, even though I still support the death penalty, I am not as headstrong about it as compared to before I watched the video, and it certainly did help me reconsider my bases as to why and how I am fully prepared to receive hate for this comment, and coming by a guy who believes Jurors aren’t a good way to declare verdicts, I probably do for my own insensitivity But, yea, I do agree it is humbling to see how this video helped me change my mind a bit
I liked the comment above mine My view on the death penalty: it's not something I like much, but I think it should be used on the most serious crimes like murder and rape. Of course, I'd want all the safeguards before conducting the death (mostly, law must ensure 100% that the accused committed the crime) I'd still want life in prison over death penalty but it is more costly to the average citizen. I see death penalty as punishment, not as a way of preventing other crimes Maybe a combination of both would be the best. But still, death penalty should only be reserved for the most serious of crimes Criminals need to think 2 times before committing a crime. If they consider the aftermath and see 10 years or 20 years in prison a price they're willing to pay... But almost no one wants to die for a petty less crime. Oh and I need to make this very clear, I believe in rehabilitation. But I don't think terrorism, murder (some cases) and rape should deserve rehabilitation. But for the other crimes, capital punishment should be illegal
Denis’ implication that the prison system is someone getting “cared for” is deeply bizzare when one considers how awful prison can be even for people who receive far lesser sentences than any murderer would.
Honestly, if they cared as much about freedom as they say they do, they'd realise just how brutal a punishment denial of freedom for an indeterminate length of time is.
@@Quintinohthree i mean.. its intended purpose and what it is do to how its run are two different things, the Prison system by its nature is meant to better a person and incorporate him back into society after a while, that however fails in many countrys for a multitude of reasons(US for example having for profit prisons which is a sick abomination of the idea behind prisons as a whole), and to the second point of "being a brutal punishment" thats the point....you commited something that, acording to society makes you unable to be free, (which leads to a funny situation in my country germany where, as the right to seek freedom is untouchable as a basic right, the Right to BE free is not, and can thus be revoked via prison sentences, however you are still free to seek freedom, thus a prisonbreak in itself is perfectly legal here.. if you dont commit any crimes doing so)
@clam its not realy about "philosophy" but with the exact reason the prison system(as most countries we consider "democratic" have implemented) exist for.(it was litteraly revolutionary at the time to use emprisonment as punihsment instead of a holding before trial(and then likely execution)..) the main goal of a prison(which btw also is called correctional facility among other similiar names) is exactly what its secondary name implies...to be a facility for the correction of people who commited crimes and preparing them for reincorporation in society, sure depending on the crime its unlikely that the reincorporation will ever actualy take place,that dosnt change the theoretical purpose of the facility however
I've been pulled over and asked if I smoked weed and after saying no over and over again, they checked my car and "found" a blunt roller in my car (it literally had the words "blunt roller" on it. If it didn't say that on there, I would not have known what it was at all) and arrested me for having weed residue. Mind you, I was initially pulled over for speeding. Cops will do whatever to fill out their quotas.
quotas are stupid. that literally means cops won't try hard to solve anything 'cause they need money, just like everyone else. and then they arrest innocents...
Yeah a couple years ago I was buying weed and picking up my friend when I got t-boned by some asshole running a stop sign. I was terrified they were going to try and pin everything on me if they saw it
The American prison system is a ready way to further harm and dehumanize some of the most vulnerable members of our society. The average American is ok that our system is punishment based not reform based. There are mulitple beneficial reasons to change our system. But that would require admitting that there is a problem that needs to be changed.
The solution to this is to ensure that anybody involved in executing wrongfully convicted prisoners also receives the death penalty. This will encourage law enforcement and the judiciary to be thorough, their life will depend on it.
@@Roy-ts9nv yeah and the people who decide if the judiciary are thorough enough should also be threatened with the death penalty, lest they make a mistake and execute an innocent judge, and the people who judge the judges of the judiciary should be threatened as well. Actually let's just give everyone spiked clubs and let you kill anyone who does something you don't like that would be rad as hell
I just thought about the potential psychological harm from misidentifying the killer of your loved one, getting an innocent person executed, and then later finding out that not only were you wrong, but the real killer committed several more murders after the fact.
Not really addressing your point here, just felt like saying that I would still hate more to be the guy who was fooled by a mass murderer into confessing you were the murderer, being put to death by the state falsely for the murder of your wife and child, while their murderer went on to kill. That is like, beyond one of the most fucked up fates.
And the families of the innocent executed people! I can't imagine how traumatizing that would be and this would haunt them for life, knowing that your loved one was murdered by the state.
Agamemnon of Mycenae “i dont care what other alphabet people do with their personal lives. The moment... they start enforcing their ridiculous demands and doctor the language...” Maybe your feelings are hurt that the things youre comfortable with, are being made more inclusive to people that youd rather not have to acknowledge... 🙄
Agamemnon of Mycenae howre you gonna use gay marriage to bolster your argument? It became legal 5 years ago ffs. And conservatives lost their minds over a wedding cake
@@dmoneyonair it was more that everyone had a go at the christian bakers for not wanting to make a cake for 2 gay men, but its fine for muslims to do so because its in their religion. It was a double standard.
"“Deserves it! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement." - Gandalf
@@aaronwalterryse4281 um I agree that revenge is what some want but thats not right in the long run. We all like to put ourselves in the shoes of the victim but what we dont stop and think about is would we want someone or others trying to get revenge on our loved ones? Most people in my opinion who are for the death penalty only are thinking about getting even or pay back but are not looking at this as a whole. You're desire for revenge actually has a negative effect on many people. The people carrying tge execution out and the family of tge executed are examples.
@@aaronwalterryse4281 I think it comes from the thought that revenge isn't always comparable to the crime and also if mouring people would choose the way person will punished it can turn into eye for an eye, torure or again- class discrimination, when a person does theft from a big corporation, because they have no money for example for food or child support and company could say "i want that person to be killed, because that would be a sing to other people not to steal from us". That can be called revenge, because it brings satisfaction to the victim. Maybe people could fight for emotional damage money (for example someone stole the only thing that reminded me from my granma), but I think it's dangerour to turn justice system into legal revenge machine.
I like the new picture. Imagine you're walking leisurely on a lovely springtime meadow. Suddenly you notice a bespectacled skull lying on the ground and it starts lecturing you on the death penalty.
PragerU: "We need god because without god, the value of life is sacred no longer" Also PragerU: "Why don't you let me kill this dude? I really fucking hate him, don't you think I should be allowed to do it?"
@@ineffablecraving8697 either way his life-protecting argument backfires But wanting logical cohesion out of Prager is like trying to nail an omelette to a wall.
to Dennis The Menace, baseline survival is a privilege, not a right. so being treated any better than the worst that is psychically possible is "being taken care of". but he probably runs his own personal torture dungeon, so...
I know this appeals more to the emotional argument side but I firmly believe prisons shouldn't be strictly punishment in the first place. They should be rehabilitation centers. If a person who's committed awful crimes and can be rehabilitated, that makes the world safer. And if a person genuinely can't adapt and rehabilitate, how much of that is in their control? If they are mentally beyond saving they should be kept away from others but still treated as human
Honestly that's an only logical statement. Punishment over rehabilitation only further causes people to funnel back into the prison system which costs more and more money. Rehabilitative prisons have been shown to produce functioning members of society while punishment base only further isolates vulnerable people. Punishment based prison sentences are not only cruel, ineffective and costly but they are completely counterproductive. But people rather live out their revenge fantasies then help those who need help most
ven that does a better way to deal with crime, sure some people are just evil/vile in general no matter what you do and need to be put in bars, but rehabilitations is general a better system with punishment being a last resort, then what we have.
I can’t stand ricky gervais these days but he did make a moving argument against the death penalty on a podcast once. Not verbatim here, but “i dont think a state can claim to be moral in punishing bad deeds when the punishment itself is undeniable cruelty and harm”. When it comes to non emotional arguments i stand by the “one wrongful execution is too many”.
I don't think this appeals to emotion AT ALL. The fact of the matter is, that most criminals are going to be released sooner or later. who the fuck benefits from them being punished in the mean time? If you comitted a crime because you lack self-controll, being put into a rigid systhem where you have no way to exercise any controll to begin with won't change anything about that. If you committed a crime out of desperation being pulled out of society and brand-marked a criminal is only going to make you more desperate. If you commited a crime because of bad influences being cooped up for years if not decades with other criminals and in direct opposition to the police is only going to increase that influence. A system that removes criminals from the other pressures and gives them a chance to reflect, readjust and actually reenter society armed with the tools and support that lets you flourish in it without resorting to crime is the only logical thing. "Criminals should be punished" is the emotional argument as it boils down to "I want the bad person to suffer" Punishing criminals isn't about justice or about helping anyone. Which is why it doesn't. It's about revenge.
Jordan Peterson saying "John Wayne Gacy, you don't wanna know about him" as if he's not one of the most high-profile serial killers of all time is so funny
For Americans, yes, but as a Brit myself, even though I have lived in the US for many years, I don't know anything about him other than that he is a serial killer.
@@EnglishMike He's a Canadian talking to an American. If I was talking to a British person, I wouldn't bring up a prolific British serial killer from the past century in a way that implies that I'm super smart for knowing who it is. It's just an example of Peterson sounding like his smug-ass self that I found amusing.
Additionally, with the “loved ones need a sense of justice” argument, there’s much better ways to go about this. Restorative Justice programs have been shown to reduce victim’s PTSD rates significantly and also help with recidivism. They’re just not popular because they’re ‘soft’.
@@r-9aarrowhead829 Warning, I have not read the full report, it's cited in my notes from studying, but Sherman and Strang (2007) is apparently the most significant study into it. www.iirp.edu/pdf/RJ_full_report.pdf
Talking about this "closure for the friends" in pure selfish terms of "healing", "reducing PTSD" and being able to resume a comfy happy life after your friend has been slaughtered, isn't necessarily what people are always talking about.
Yes but yo have to remember you're making this argument with conservatives. People who generally don't believe in psychology, psychiatry and these days not even medicine or any research that contradicts their bias.
The weird thing is, I've heard all the components of this argument, but never seen them together as a coherent argument against the death penalty. I didn't expect to have my mind in the subject changed in the first 10-15 minutes of a 40-minute video, but here we are.
Well, a video can be persuasive if you get bombarded suddenly with arguments you haven't heard articulated a certain way before (before you get a chance to consider and think of counter-arguments). But, be sure to mull it over and scrutinise it. I say this as someone who is against the death penalty, but still advocates for people to be convinced of their standpoint for the right reasons (whatever their conclusion).
Reading Victor Hugo's book (last day of a condemned person or something like that would probably be the english title) really gave me an understanding as to why the death penalty needs to be abolished and stay abolished. Not saying you're not allowed to disagree, just for me it's pretty clear
@@teergeret Could you summarize his argument? I hold the opinion that capital punishment is beneficial to the purpose of a safer society and provides a certain amount of deterrence. Also, enacting the punishment is a strict procedural matter. It's no different than, say, a police officer writing out a parking ticket because you violated a local traffic code. There is no 'state murdering people', it's just the logical consequence of breaking certain laws; the state has no agency whatsoever. Concerning the deaths of innocents: it should be weighted against the pros of permanently removing dangerous members from society.
@@GQ2593 they are already removed from society by being put in prison. Executing them is just a riskier, permanent, feel-good alternative to life in prison.
@@GQ2593 it boils down to something like "if it's only to remove them from society, why not lock them up for life. If it's for revenge, in what way is the society killing someone better than the killer himself. And I think he also has a funny little cartoon where the guy leading a criminal to the guillotine is lead to one himself and that cycle pretty much repeats itself forever ^^
The death penalty isnt justice, it's revenge. Being "cared for" in a prison for the rest of your life is not as pleasant as pro death penalty advocates would have you believe.
@@petra1995 People in quarantine at least have their own home to sit in and do anything they want. A person in prison for life will never again have the same freedoms as a person on the outside.
@@devonmolina5200 Which is exactly the point, I believe. People are going stir-crazy while staying in (presumably) far nicer conditions than prison, so if those same people got a life imprisonment, they would be even worse off.
People usually point to inmates being offered TVs and stuff. But like, if you stole a couple of hundreds of quids worth of stuff and nobody was hurt. You're sent to prison for a couple of years and you are showing remorse for what you've done then let them have a TV. Surely the idea is to say, hey look a nice honest life is good you don't have to resort to robbery to get stuff.
If you want to win against the Republicans it would probably help to understand the arguments from the other side instead of dismissing them or just not caring. Which seems weird of you to say considering I care about the left wings view because I either agree or want to convince them of a different view. The reason the right have been winning so much is because they tend to watch both left and right wing content. That's not the case for most left wing people, who usually only watch left wing content.
@@cody967 Here you go www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/the-righteous-mind-by-jonathan-haidt.html theindependentwhig.com/haidt-passages/haidt/conservatives-understand-liberals-better-than-liberals-understand-conservatives/ Also I know you're going find this offensive, but there are also a disproportionate amount of mentally ill people on that left. That's not to say that leftism makes people unwell, but they there are typically more mentally ill people who are attracted to the left. Would you like a citation of that aswell?
@@eaglebearer I care about what working class right wingers do and don't understand but I don't care about what rich right wingers do and don't understand. I have no reason to believe Dennis Prager *actually* doesn't understand counteraguments, his job and his wealth depends on him not understanding them or pretending not to. The mistake is when you treat Dennis Prager as if he shares the same interests as the working class people who watch his videos. He does not.
In 8th grade I was writing an essay about why we should use the death penalty, but when doing research for my paper I ended up changing my mind and completely flipped sides for my essay.
That's a pretty heavy topic for someone of...13-14 years of age, I think? How did that happen? Did your teacher assign that subject or did you decide on it yourself?
@@TirOrah I decided the topic. The assignment was we had to write an arguementative essay, but we had to do a lot of research for it and do things like find scholarly articles, annotate articles, find 5 for our stance and 5 against, etc. The main focus was in the information gathering.
@@indiana47 Whoa, that's very cool! I wish they'd given us such an assignment when I was in secondary school! Well, young me probably would've detested it, but something like that can teach you some good skills for later in life. Thanks for responding!
Actually I had to do this too,it was part of our exam in my native language. I’m not 100% sure how good of an idea that was,but for me,it helped me gain insight on the matter.
@@TirOrah I'm doing one right now. we're studying the Bill of Rights and debating whether the death penalty goes against the 8th amendment (no cruel or unusual punishment)
I'm a right wing libertarian and would say that I'm pro life in both aspects. I can understand with the general right wing view that if someone murders someone else that criminal has essentially taken someone's rights, so the justice system enacting the same punishment in return makes sense. It would be nice if Mass shooters, serial killers and pedophiles are killed. But we can't give that power.
@@soyborne.bornmadeandundone1342 i was expecting that we are getting full dutch mob and make ourself cannibals. But yes ,herbivores have a better taste than the other two.
@@kaitlyn__L funny enough i already know that from somewhere ,but is always better to warn than to start with the assumption that might be wrong and have negative results. P.S.:Thanks for warning.
@@Avi2Nyan That's kinda how he gets so many people. Cleaning your room and the government not executing people are good ideas. Then he trojan horses his bullshit behind it.
I may be adding a comment to a year old video, but I wanted to get this thought out. Going with the closure argument, if we take into account the idea of an innocent person being wrongly executed the argument becomes even more flimsy from my point of view. I imagine that learning the person you thought killed your loved one(s) and who was executed, was actually innocent would be distressing and even more traumatic.
Especially if you were a witness for the prosecution, e.g. giving a false identification or something. The guilt you'd feel would make everything even worse.
Many that live deserve death, and some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo? .. Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. Even the very wise can not see all ends. -Gandalf
That quote gets a lot more weight if you remember that Tolkien saw trench warfare in WWI. He is not talking in an abstract way. He probably could put a lot of faces to both halves of the first sentence.
@@xCorvus7x Nah there aren't. There are probably only a bakers dozen of those people who actually care about the mother. The rest of them however undoubtedly don't. They don't support providing pre-natal care to mothers, healthcare to poor mothers, meals and child care for poor mothers and children, basically nothing that would actually improve their lives. They basically only support the state forcing her to give birth. Of course you can't really say you care about a mother if you also support infringing on her bodily autonomy
@@moosesandmeese969 Pro birth, not pro life. Cause once that baby is born the mother is villainized for daring to be a single mother, and how dare she may need help financially, gotta pull yourself up by your bootstraps, why should anyone get any help. Or "Just put it up for adoption", while the foster system is already so overrun with kids that never end up adopted. Every single person that says adoption rather than abortion should be required to pay for the bills the mother still has the whole time, and then have to adopt at least one of the kids that aren't as likely to be adopted; older, not white, disabled, ect.
@@normandy2501 That's such an amazing way of stating it. Never watched Black Mirror (more of a Handmaid's Tale kinda gal), but those are some interesting observations! Luv from Australia! :)
I absolutely love the point about the inconsistency in the “big government” argument about the police and the military. How is that not big government? To those kinds of people, better healthcare and environmental protections are tyranny. I’ve never understood that.
For some people it's not knowing the concept of possitive vs negative freedom and/or obsession with the latter one. Than there is also the hyper individualism (Wich leads to people not seeing systemic issues) Many are just in a contest on treating poor people the worst possible way and holding up supremacy
It's because the pundits who advocate this kind of shit are paid off by giant conglomerates whose best interests lie in keeping industries like health care privatized.
My aunt (Irish but married an American) is anti taxes and big government. She was complaining about that stuff to my mum one time and my mum replied "Your husband works for the US military. Your entire life is paid for by taxes." She had no response The cognitive dissonance is astounding
They just want the poor to subsidize their private security forces while they pocket more ill-gotten gains. And if they aren't wealthy, they got bluepilled by the right-wing media machine. Catching someone in a contradiction is pretty irrelevant when they are lying about their basis for *both* positions.
I have actually met an ex-cop (big shocker) who had no problem with the death penalty killing a few innocent people along the way because in his mind, they still must have done something bad in their lives to deserve "divine justice", whether or not the state knew about it.
I used to be in favor of the death penalty...until I got my degree in forensic anthropology. After which, yeah, I get to see exactly how fallible the human element is in employing the forensic tools available. Like the time a Texas Ranger visited the body farm ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that he had hard photo and video evidence that would get someone sentenced to death. Long story short, they had received an anonymous tip that someone had murdered, dismembered, and disposed of a body; sent the video in, identified 'who' was in the video. The Ranger just needed an expert to come in to the court explain the gruesome video and convince the jury that 'this is why we'll never find a body.' The video was a fucking tape showing a Tibetan Skyburial. And the photos were of the same event. The Texas legal system was ready to murder an innocent guy over literal documentary footage from Tibet. If that doesn't reveal the flaws in human judgement, not much will. (P.S. - The footage was identified correctly. And it was pointed out that Texas lacks both the type of vulture seen as well as lacking the actual hills and mountains covered in grass. I believe the case was immediately, and quietly dropped. I mean, since we didn't hear anything about it. But hey, it's Texas, entirely possible they just locked the innocent guy up anyway.)
The deterrent argument: Many of the most prolific killers who get caught have preferred to take their own lives, rather than spend their lives in prison- indicating that prison is a greater deterrent to a calculating mind. In recent years this has included both Harold Shipman and Fred West, in terms of serial killers. For spree killers it has included Michael Ryan, and 16 of the 25 most deadly attacks in the US have seen the perpetrator either kill themselves at the scene- or commit 'suicide by cop'. To me this seems to be very much an indicator that life imprisonment is significantly more of a deterrent than a death penalty to those with that sort of mind set- even in countries that have no death penalty!
True. On the other hand, people like Myra Hindley kinda enjoyed being the center of attention, despite also wanting to let out of prison. Motivation changed a lot depending on the person. Speaking of, I'm fairly sure every pro death penalty argument in Britain by law has to mention the Moors Murders. Shadow of the rope is a phrase I remember a lot when reading about that case.
@@LadyTylerBioRodriguez Most folks who do such crimes brazenly have absolutely no problem being killed; most kill themselves if they don't get detained. What do you call someone who acts in violence towards another group of individuals without any care or consideration taken to ethics, and most notably, to interpersonal communication and the double empathy problem? usa foreign policy
@@felicityc Yeah most people who kill repeatedly are not humble. They think they can escape the law everytime. They are too smart to get caught. Death penalty has no impact on these people. People like Harold Shipmen didn't care one bit about getting caught because they never considered that an outcome.
It’s genuinely baffling how well-written and structured these videos are. Shaun just takes an issue and whittles away at it with laser-beam precision until he’s carved an unnaturally smooth and satisfying sculpture of an idea. I don’t want to make out that I’m unfamiliar with, you know, good writing. Like this is the best possible thing on offer. There’s a lot of stuff out there, but there’s also an overwhelming amount of trash that we all kind of accept as “good enough” because it’s the best that most of us can to manage to create and engage with given how busy we all are, and how many kinds of thoughts and events and opinions are demanding our attention. This is functionally flawless. The bits where flaws are unavoidable are left on the cutting room floor, and you have only this incredibly relaxing experience of a video that just exclusively makes sense.
I had similar thoughts watching this one, even though I already knew and agreed with all of the arguments Shaun uses individually, seeing them put together so completely and seamlessly, and the little gotchas about Jordan Peterson disagreeing with Mr Prager, were all so pleasing. As I had all of these thoughts, a phrase entered my mind.... "getting owned by facts and logic".... I felt a bit dirty having that realisation, but at least it also let me viscerally realise why so many people say that kind of rhetoric. That satisfaction is still the same underpinning emotion, even though most people who will say that phrase are being extremely aggressive about it all, and Shaun really is like, the antithesis of aggressive.
"People in government will sell government influence for personal and political gain." Gee, Dennis, you wouldn't have any experience with that, would you?
Prager also made an entire video on why paying politicians for influence is a good thing. Of course, he also made a video about how unions doing that is a bad thing.
@@dragongirl7978 In terms of explicit arguments, yes. The trick, I would suggest, is looking at the ideology of the right as being about power and victory, more than specific principles. A whole lot that didn't make sense before will, if you look at it through that lens. The problem, of course, is that it's difficult to sell people on. TBH, I'm not even sure that most right-wingers are fully aware of the uniting thread behind their claimed positions. The outright fascists are, though.
My girlfriend was killed through vehicular manslaughter and the killer walked away with a broken ankle. I will never forget that a relative told me that they hoped the guy who killed her would get the death penalty. She said it hedgingly, practically stuttering it out. If we are that uncomfortable with the revoking of a human life, why the hell are we advocating for it? When I gave my impact statement in the courtroom, I cried, my friends cried, but even the man who had killed her seemed moved. “I’m so sorry,” he said, “hearing what you’ve said, it feels as though I’ve taken away a little piece of heaven on earth.” I do not want Cole Mitchel dead. I want him to know what he did and I want him to do better.
I’m so sorry for your loss. I wish you, your friends, and your family the best. I hope Mitchel can grow as a human and become a normal member of society.
I've wondered about the dramatic trope of sending those guilty of classically capital crimes on dangerous missions, not vainly or vengefully but because that's the only way the missions can be carried out. Would that be a bad idea?
Hbomberguy, Contrapoints, Philosophy Tube: *Uses lighting, costumes, skits, and dialogues to creatively elaborate on the points they make in their videos* Me: "Perfection." Shaun: *Puts up a stagnant picture of a skull wearing sunglasses with no variation whatsoever* Me: "Perfection."
mivical that wasn't adding a mustache to the skull, that was clearly a different guy, who was a supporter of the death penalty. Shaun is the skull that opposes it, silly billy!
I hate the death penalty. Absolutely despise it. It’s morally wrong and economically insufficient and I agree with anyone who opposes the death penalty. Yet I would consider my self more politically right then left. What bothers me the most are people who will argue against the death penalty passionately yet fight for abortion, euthanasia, and war. It’s terrible that someone would argue for the life of a t for a evil guilty murder rather than a young innocent child. I think that the right and conservatives are usually the ideologically advocates for life with a single acceptation of the death penalty. This comment makes conservative sound like bumbling hypocritical idiots. Most of us aren’t like that. Many of us advocate against the death penalty, and many of conservatives have actual intellectual arguments. Don’t use straw men. It makes you sound uneducated without and a argument and promotes ignorant.
I'm not for the death penalty and I'm a conservative. I'm not really super against it either but if I were a governor and a bill to ban the death penalty in my state was passed I would sign it without hesitation.
@@georgefisher9426 I think the problem hes getting at is that those who want the death penalty trend towards the right, but yes, he could've been more specific that not all conservatives (not Republicans mind you, there is a difference) think that way. As far as abortion goes, that seems like a non sequitur, since comparing an execution being administered by the government to a medical procedure done by a private medical professional to someone who actively chose to have it done is a bit of a stretch. Sure, both result in a corpse, but the context is important. And as for wanting things to be pro life, Republicans have generally been the ones to trend more likely to throw our military into wars, refuse to give people affordable (and life saving) healthcare, and drag their feet on providing affordable housing and welfare programs to help those have a life. Maybe this is just from my experience and would love to hear examples of how things might be different, but I would especially be interested in why you identify as right leaning?
@ippos_khloros I think his point was that facts not feelings is something that was started by ben Shapiro and other conservative voices (including prager), claiming that left leaning circles only do what makes them feel good. But when asked why Dennis prager supports the death penalty, he resorts to feelings and emotion over fact, thereby contradicting himself.
@@zompired2998 Putting material from a range of utterly unrelated things into a blender, and turning it into something both entirely different yet inherently related to its sources. th-cam.com/video/k5vsFhcABG4/w-d-xo.html Results range from atrocious to outright funny, bizarre and/or surreal.
Heyo Shaun, used to have very conservative thought, when I was 17-18, because I was in a very depressive phase and was barely around people anymore. I later on knew, that these thoughts were irrational, when I started working out and looking up how nutrition works. But even then I still had the emotional part of these conservative thoughts. It’s channels like yours, that help me getting out that last bit, which was keeping me from daring to bond with people. You will probably never read this, but I want to thank you, for helping people who used to be rational, getting back on the right track again.
Yup. Those shows where the cops are all young good looking go getters who will stop at nothing to stop the very very stupid criminals with their endless cash flow to use special tools to help them solve cases easier... Mean while in reality many American towns have like 2 cops that everyone knows and they can barely hold one criminal for the night lol....
@@soyborne.bornmadeandundone1342 Granted reality is very different to television in many regards, not least the science aspect, the weight of evidence and police "infallibility"... but in defence of (some) small town officers or sheriff's - they have an advantage in knowing the entire town and can often spot behaviour or circumstances out of character for their small district, where a city police force can struggle. Corruption, prejudice and the itch to close a case at any cost can happen in any place.
He didnt show you that the death penalty in and of itself He showed you a corrupt justice system who abuses the death penalty A corrupt justice system will take life death penalty or none No death penalty does nothing for humanity but a better justice system does ya dingbat
A surgeon who saved my life lost his family to gang violence in a case of mistaken identity. The guy is a saint and visited them in prison and forgave them. Hatred shouldn’t become us.
That is a nice story and all, but it won't appeal to many people. You do not have to forgive, you do not even have to accept, or be happy about, or even not wish these people dead: You can feel and want all those things, and yet still arrive at the conclusion that death penalty doesn't provide almost any of the benefits we think it does. I know for a fact that if someone murdered my family, I'd probably give everything up and kill them in cold blood for revenge, but still oppose the death penalty. Is it hypocritical? Maybe. But maybe it is just my logic and my irrational human emotions just not agreeing, and in any intellectual conversation I cannot condone capital punishment. Emotionally I can, but I will not let my emotions dictate what is reality.
@@7PlayingWithFire7 at least you can admit the core ideal of the death penalty: revenge. I haven’t heard of a decent argument for capital punishment that doesn’t include revenge.
@@nickthompson1812 I very slightly support capital punishment, but certainly not in the manner that it's carried out by countries that currently use it. In my opinion, if someone is convicted and is set to be imprisoned until they die - then they themselves should be allowed to request the death penalty. There would have to be governance in place to ensure that they are not forced to request it under duress however. This would give wrongfully-convicted people the ability to appeal and rightfully-convicted people the option to avoid many decades in prison without hope of release. This system then avoids the revenge or malice point. Although I can understand people being uncomfortable with giving criminals agency over their sentence.
@@lewis4200 I see where you're coming from but I think the logic is kind of flawed. People who have been wrongfully imprisoned probably don't have much faith in the justice system and not much hope that they'll be proven innocent so I think a lot of them would request the death penalty as well
I'm a little surprised that you didn't mention the fact that the best estimates for wrongfully convicted inmates on death row hover around 5%--which means that if one supports the death penalty, then mathematically, one is saying that they find it acceptable to murder one innocent person for the sake of righteously executing 19 people who theoretically deserve it. That's a pretty psychotically high price to be willing to pay for all of the supposed benefits of the death penalty, let alone the moral quagmire you've roped yourself into where you're saying that on the one hand, one deserves to die for killing an innocent, but on the other that you're willing to kill innocents as a necessary cost of executing the murderers.
I've been pro death penalty most of my life, but this video has caused me to think about it in ways I haven't before. then again I was pretty much raised in a PragerU style way.
i know it’s been two years since this comment and i have no clue how/where you’ve ended up. but i just wanted to congratulate on being willing to change and learn and not blindly accepting what you’ve learned your entire life. i hope all is good, sending good vibes in your direction. edit: your subscriptions are public so im sending even more good vibes. you have good taste.
@@genericname3206 It still exists in America, and that's my issue. All our methods are inhumane, the innocence ratio is too high, and if human life is to be cherished, then the murderer should have the rest of their life devoted to the family of that person.
“Many that live deserve death, and some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.” - Gandalf
Let me introduce to you a concept called justice. What Gandalf was talking about was killing someone in cold blood. The death penalty comes after a trial and a very thorough investigation. Congratulations, you misquoted Gandalf.
@@ryancroy Gandalf was talking about killing Gollum, when Frodo proposed that it would inflict less suffering on Gollum and everyone else to just kill him and have it done with. If anything, Frodo's proposal was self-defense, as Gollum had tipped off the wraiths to where the Bagginses were.
@@ryancroy it specifically refers to judging whether or not someone should live or die. how the fuck are you trying to act like it's taken out of context and doesn't refer to judgement. also this is In Cold Blood. Hot Blooded murder is murder in the heated moment cold blooded is premeditated, like openly pondering over whether or not someone deserves to die with 12 of your closest friends. The justice system is designed to remove all 'hot blood' from the equation and decide what objectively happened and needs to happen as a result.
Shaun: "And that is ulitmately a worse crime than me, as an individual, not getting what I want" Conservatives: "There is no worse crime than me, as an individual, not getting what I want"
"Most murderers aren't thinking logically. If they were, they probably wouldn't be murdering someone" This sort of phrasing amuses me and only has that effect thanks to your tone of voice and on-point deliveries. Great stuff.
@Mister Guy he talked abt organized crime in the video tho and how that's very different, a lot of murders are cases where emotional tension or mental stress got too high and people snapped. motivations arent 100% logical and while they come from base emotions of fear and survival and trying to cope with situations, a person isn't really thinking about the value of life when they suddenly grab a gun off the table, they're analyzing the situation sure but they're also often greatly exaggerating the situation/being blinded by their emotions and that doesn't lead to a fool-proof analysis and nor does it negate the chance of impulsive decision making plus that just completely erases murderers with corrupt reasoning skills or corrupt moral compasses, neither of those things are exactly "logical thinking"
A lot of murderers are completely logical people. Their logic isn’t exactly sound, but they truly believed they were justified in what they did. The Unabomber is a good example.
@conan263 There's a difference between motivation and execution (no pun intended), though. A murderer may plan out a perfect, utterly genius tactic for taking out a coworker, but that doesn't make the motivation any more logical if it's simply because the coworker was on a date with a girl the murderer fancies.
Im endlessly struck by how odd it is to both implore support for the death penalty because of the suffering these murderers inflicted while also dismissing entirely the suffering inflicted by a wrongful execution of an innocent person.
What about the suffering of the victims? Should that be forgotten? Wrongful execution is much, much rarer than repeat offences. I'd say it's a fair risk to take
Well look at you willing to throw innocents to death. All under the presumption that death of the criminal would erase suffering from his victims' families. How's that more effective than life in prison? It certainly isnt cheaper for tax payers or humanely pursued. Also at least 4% of convictions being wrongful for death row isnt rare.
That's a rather interesting limitation for a few reasons. Only 11 states have even had an execution in the last 10 years. The rest have suspended or repealed capital punishment. However there are a few recent cases receiving a lot of scrutiny that havent been fully exonerated post death like Nathaniel Woods and Cameron Todd Willingham. Another common statistic from the Death Penalty Information Center cites 190 exonerated victims of the death penalty since 1973. In short the lack of innocents killed seems more a result of the lack of anyone being killed rather than justice being more accurate in recent years.
@@idkusername5789 You don't have to be a biology student to understand why. Say you collect DNA from the crime scene, for example from the murder weapon. A result pops up, and it turns out that the murder weapon was handled by the guy in the gun store. Is the guy in the gun store then definitely guilty? Or was he just the one who sold the weapon? This is exaggerated a bit to help further understanding. The point is, many could have handled the weapon, and thus anyone who handled the murder weapon could come up as positive in a DNA test.
@@idkusername5789 i recommend reading the paper "are dna tests infallible?" published by the international society for forensic genetics, which neatly outlines the various possibilities for error in the dna testing process. for a more in-depth read, "the potential for error in forensic dna testing (and how that complicates the use of dna databases for criminal identification)" by william c. thompson for the council for responsible genetics goes into a great deal of the detail you seem to be looking for in a youtube comments section.
@@sethwilliams8625 It's weird honestly Why Russia?! He is Canadian and spends lots of time in America, he could go to a rehab in either county. Many people get addicted every day but his case is the weirdest one
The fact that PragerU says that when someone gets murdered and the murderer inflicts "unimaginable terror" and the victims' family members have to watch as the person who murdered their loved one, they say the penalty should be death. But when a police officer murders someone, gets paid leave while there's an investigation of a murder on video from 8 different angles, while the police as a whole then crack down and inflict unimaginable terror on the community that's calling for justice... well they should've just complied, it's ok to have killed them because they didn't do everything the police said, despite none of them having been indicted much less convicted for any crime whatsoever. Resisting arrest is a charge, it's a thing you bring against someone in court, it's not an argument for capitol punishment carried out by a government employee with a gun. Gods this kind of thing makes me so angry
@@DeaconPain there are less then 20 cases per year where police kill a suspect, less than 10 black suspects. At the same time there are thousands of murder victims a year, many who are black. Black people have far more to fear from black criminals than they do from cops. And so what? We shouldn’t execute murderers because rarely a suspect dies in police custody? One has nothing to do with the other
Police "mistakes" are ubiquitous. Years ago in Barcelona there was an incident in which the police tried to stop an illegal party with over a hundred attendants in the center of the city, and people at the party threw objects at them from the building. One of the policemen was gravely injured and ended up in a coma. The police detained and brutally tortured some young people they found at the street nearby, and later a young girl they found at a nearby hospital, just because of their "punk esthetic". None of them were at the party at the moment nor had they been there. They were convicted for attempted murder based solely on two policemen's witness, which were later found to lie on a separate case. The girl committed suicide a few years later. There is an award-winning documentary on these events. Unfortunately we cannot put a team of journalists and filmmakers to work for months behind every single case. th-cam.com/video/AyGbIfV0paw/w-d-xo.html
In France, during manifestations, several persons were badly injured or killed by "non-lethal" weapons. Including innocent persons not manifesting (not to say the manifestants were not innocents :p), like an old lady who get her head out of her window to look the manifestation, killed by a rubber ball while she was at the second floor ^^' Yeah, policemen are always right in their use of violence :D
quick observation, but the mustached pro-death penalty argument of "its just not being done ENOUGH" around 28 mins in is the exact same logical argument for "crony" capitalism just needing to be more aggressively capitalist to work. like "its not working cause you arent doing it Hard Enough"
I admire your linking of the death penalty to capitalism which has its faults but has up to this point in history has been the defacto most successful and in terms of innovations in inventions and technology capitalism has produced pretty much every major human achievement and inventions that greatly improved humans daily lives (automobiles,computers,internet,cell phones,telephones, solar panels, the light bulb and I could go on) all these either in there existence, or being modified to be more consumer friendly and more easily accessed to larger amounts of people due to capitalism and people being able to put there genius into a way that both gave them motivation to pursue these due to financial stability and legacy and also to continue making it the best version of it can be or someone else will end up doing it, it's not perfect and I think no matter what you have to have some social programs put in place for people to at least have a access to food, shelter, health care to a extent that's reasonable but also not the bare minimum, and lastly when u look at any other forms of government it'd either very small countries who can afford and distribute social programs with much more ease then large countries (amd even these have capitalism ideals in that it has a free market and citizens can pursue whatever they want in terms of money earning or making) and suggesting anything close to Marxism, communism or fascism is just not a serious argument as a small look into the human suffering and genocides that these governments have committed are unbelievable in terms of numbers and most have trouble not collapsing in less then 10 years
that's the annoying thing for a lot of stuff, whenever stuff like this fails the reason given is that they simply didn't do it enough, note how they won't do stuff like this for welfare or free healthcare
Ira because they either don't want to think about it or they don't want us to know they want to be the executioner. They also don't like to consider the fact that they themselves deserve punishment by their own standards.
That is the one argument against the death penalty that gives me pause. I certainly wouldn’t want to be an executioner and I’m sure there is a lot of mental anguish for those who are executioners. I suppose there is some comfort in knowing that lethal injection is painless and the murderer deserves to be executed and therefore justice is being done A soldier who kills the enemy may feel bad about it but we still need soldiers
@@gopher7691 except lethal injection is often not painless. It’s against our oath for a physician to participate in state sanctioned murder, and the AMA code of ethics states that we cannot even opine on execution methods or which one would be best for a prisoner. Because actually clinicians are essentially never involved in lethal injections and the medications they get are sometimes substandard or not mixed correctly, the process has a good chance of not being painless.
@@Sienisota I don’t know the best way. If you say so. All I know is the Oklahoma City bomber killed 29 children and he deserved to die. I certainly don’t want to torture him, but he must be executed The guillotine is gruesome to watch and has unpleasant associations with the French Revolution. But hey if you want to convince your legislators to make it an option good luck to you.
The irreversibility of the death penalty is the reason I'm against it. I can easily name some people throughout history who deserve to die. But I don't believe it's possible to create a justice system that is reliable enough to mete out a penalty that can not be reversed if it turns out to be a mistake.
You'd need to literally be capital-G God levels of omniscient and infallible to get justice perfectly right. Seems to me like our justice system shouldn't be taking the hard approach, too much risk.
@@f1neman with dna testing aren’t we more sure of guilt now? Why is dna testing good enough to free the innocent but not good enough to execute the guilty
It's also worth mentioning that one reason why the death penalty is banned in the EU is because the government could use it to suppress political groups.
@Britannic so ehm, how about the crusades? And the whole thing in france between Catholics and protestants? The 80 year war? The Spanish Inquisition? Augustine? The army of god? Emperor Constantine? Adolf Hitler? All the middle eastern people who have been killed by christian soldiers, from the biggest christian nation in the world (us)?
Britannic Eye for eye is not literal. It's referring to requiring those that hurt someone to pay their victim an amount that is equivalent to the damage they received. That has nothing to do with the death penalty, which God specifically demands be given to murderers.
I'd also like to say that the first and main proponent of abolishing the death penalty in europe (i believe maybe in the whole world) was an italian writer called cesare beccaria, who *in the 1700s* wrote an extensive treatise detailing why both the death penalty and torture were immoral/useless/etc., and his writing caught on making it so his home state, the grandduchy of tuscany (this was before italy was unified as a single state) was among the first, if not *the* first to abolish the death penalty. So yeah, we figured this shit out in the 1700s, it's a bit worrying that other states like the us are still three centuries behind.
@@ErbBetaPatched God also specifically demands that a man lay down with his daughters as he would his wife. Not to mention even though he knew humans would bite the apple and succumb to sin, yet made them anyway so that they can likely go to hell, unless they are his special snowflakes who worship only him, because god is a jealous god. Then he let his only son get murdered horrifically to save people. Sooo... I'm pretty sick of people supporting a sadistic megalomaniac and telling everyone that he loves them. If he exists, he's not a god worth worshipping. He rules through fear and malice.
The Goal of Criminal Justice System is to deal with criminality in a systematic way with a minimum of human suffering. It is not to give you an endorphin hit from having criminals brutalized.
@Terncote Great point Terncote. Why can't these fools just stick to harmless video game violence to get their rocks off? That's what I do to get that feeling of power... Guess it's not good enough unless it's the real thing. To me that's sick...... Treat others with humanity please! Enter fantasy land if you want to be a cruel king.
That's what it should be. It's definitely to give the sensation of order restored to the public, reinforcing the system itself, without any regard for human suffering.
Sometimes it feels like Dennis specifically selects all of his opinions just to piss me off individually. Like he's some kind of antagonist Christ, that knows me personally and is intent on aggravating within me what I assume is medically referred to as super-alcoholism.
Once my dad stumbled upon the conservative radio station, and Dennis Prager was this depressed man on the station spewing absolute bullshit then advertising a product, I can’t believe this man exists
@@cursedcat6467 In the two years since I made this comment, my blood pressure rose so high that I had to start blood pressure medication and almost completely quit drinking. Dennis's bullshit caused me to almost die and was also my salvation in some indirect way.
My personal reasons for being against the death penalty: First, it's just too rife with errors and mistakes. You can't undo any punishment, really, but being dead makes an apology extra difficult. Second, it's not about big government or small government, I just don't want a function of government to be killing prisoners, period. Huge government for education and healthcare, if that's what it takes, great, but I vote "no" to the Bureau of Killing People In Our Custody.
Third, if someone becomes a criminal, society failed in some way. One doesn't deal with failures by killing them, it's your job to fix them somehow. At least try.
@@swanpride I don't think that makes much sense. If someone commits a crime as being wronged, like the father of a victim killing the killer. Then yes, society has failed you. But society is not responsible for your emotions and actions or lack of your responsibility. If you get mad at your neighbour, and go and kill him, or break into someone's house to rob and kill them, then that's on you. And you deserve to take responsibility for your action.
Doesn't that first point kinda remove any punishment? Since even having a criminal offense on your record can ruin future job prospects, regardless of if the decision was later overturned.
I watched a documentary comparing the prison system in the US to that in Norway, known as being one of the most humane and successful prison systems in the world. In Norway there's no death penalty, and the maximum sentence even for murder is 21 years. At the end of the documentary, the interviewer asked one of the Norwegian prison officials (I can't remember if it was a guard or somebody higher up in the justice system) what she would say to the family of a murder victim who wanted the perpetrator to suffer. The official said that wanting them to suffer is an emotional reaction, but they are the department of corrections, not of emotional reactions. I can't find the video but I'll always remember that quote.
PolySaken Since the American prison system focuses on retribution rather than rehabilitation, it’s less likely that a person will change, unfortunately. But obviously it’s not impossible.
So Brevjik or whatever the fuck his name was kills 70+ people, and gets to spend the rest of his days in a warm, comfortable cell, playing on a Playstation and eating 3 square meals a day? The Norwegians have a funny idea of justice.
@@hellboy6507 From what I understand, they are reviewed at the end of their sentence, and the sentence can be extended by increments of five years at a time if they are still deemed as unsafe.
the 'bringing closure to family' is such a weird argument - like, that's clearly not a universal sentiment (at least, not always the strongest one), so, if the family doesn't want to have anyone killed on their behalf, it's totally pointless, and even harmful... but it's also obviously unjust for a murderer to get a different punishment based on the beliefs of their victim/victim's family, which is probably why that's not (explicitly) how it works in basically any other situation.
Especially if the family doesn't want the killer killed. I've heard about families of murder victims having to defend the murderer just so that their values and morals didn't get flushed down the crapper when the killer went to the chair. If that's not fucked, IDK what is.
@@natesmodelsdoodles5403 Anyone who defends the death penalty based on that is acting selfishly. Nothing more. Remind them of that, this thirst for blood is not for those wronged. It's for them only.
He certainly never sounds like a real person making a real argument. Even when he argues against the death penalty it sounds like he'd rather not be doing so.
My opinion actually changed watching this. I used to write essays supporting capital punishment in college, but now that it was brought to my attention that you can separate criminals deserving death from the government being able to inflict it, I feel rather enlightened. Thank you.
Same. That was the key that got me. I still believe some folk deserve death, but frik the government if they think they have the right to carry it out.
@@PopeGoliath That is so correct. I am anti-death penalty and always have been, but at the same time, I very much believe there ARE people who deserve to die. People who murder, rape, torture or sexually abuse children, for example. If someone caught a criminal murdering or raping his wife and killed them in a rage, I'd probably applaud. But it's quite different if you get the state to do it 20 years later in cold blood.
The commandment says you shall not murder. Kill and murder are two different things, killing can be righteous. But of course a lot of bleeding hearts like you just interchange them in this context
@@powltato6192 you’re very wrong then. The “ten commandments” are written in Hebrew originally and that commandment says לֹא תִרְצָח which when translated into our context means you will not kill unlawfully, which is what we call murder. Killing was permitted as the death penalty was literally part of some commandments as the punishment for certain crimes, and therefore was not a violation of לֹא תִרְצָח.
Why would that be the case? Housing and healthcare are a necessity for human survival. How is wanting the bare minimum to live "an emotional argument"?
@@mayamayhemmusic Not wanting to have hunger and freeze on the streets are all "emotions". Just adjusting the often falsely applied dichotomy of "emotional argument vs. logical argument", which isn't really an accurate model - emotions/instincts lie at the core of every fundamental value or goal; smaller instincts/emotions, less accepted/acknowledged by the ego, can be in conflict (or harmony) with the more fundamental ones; or, they can indirectly lie in conflict with them, by disrupting with the "rational" pathway of achieving those fundamental goals. These secondary "interfering" impulses can very well end up replacing the previously accepted, fundamental impulses that informed the "core values" - thus becoming the new, alternate core values. That's a much more accurate model, both applicable to political views as well as personal discipline etc.
@@username45739 It's really not emotional at all, even if many people make emotional cases for such. You can logically conclude most leftist policies have a fundamental putpose of getting the most out of tax dollars, while getting the best results. Both of these policies clearly fall in line with this.
He’s actually a pretty intelligent guy, especially when it comes to like psychology. He has a lot of far fetched, yet interesting ideas. He’s not just the sort if conservative talking head that should be written off without listening to anything he has to say.
the "let's execute the rich" argument usually tend to overlook the resources(lawyers, money and all that influence) they have, which backfires on the lowly citizen when brought up into court. so i suggest be wary of it if so happen you see it popping up in other discussions.
Problem is that the people who control systems of power are never going to support using those systems in ways that could harm them without a significant upside. The rich and powerful have every reason to diminish the punishment for the financial and political crimes they are often guilty of. This is why the harshest punishments are not extended to the most harmful crimes. No one gets the death penalty for stealing hundreds of millions from the people, even though it likely caused objectively more harm than a handful of direct murders. The harshest white collar convictions only happen to those who stole from other rich people, as a way to preserve the shared class interest. The death penalty is the most primitive expression of state power possible. As a result it is also completely shaped by the nature of said power.
@@ayeyobossman6151 some people can't stand what he's saying. But, watch any video, he's being violently shut down, not disagreed with. If there is a single argument against his points, no one was capable enough to bring it forward.
My country's method of execution is hanging and the last time anyone was hanged was on March 2020 and it was a group of 4 people convicted of raping, torturing and murdering a 24 yr old. I felt grim satisfaction as I read about how they were vilified, tortured in prison (by guards and other prisoners) and then were finally hanged. But then I recalled a report from few years before where there was another gang rape case and the accused were taken to the crime scene "for cross checking testimonies" and they were shot for "injuring an officer and trying to escape". This were clearly extrajudicial killings and I remember being disgusted with how these police officers were lauded by the public and their chief as heroes. And anyone who pointed this out were treated like rape apologists. It was so easy to just kill the wrong person like what they did here. And now thanks to you Shaun, I can see how this easily applies to death penalty as well. If these officers can just shirk the consequences of an open murder, then just expediting the process of death penalty just causes the same thing except that we will never know. Make no mistake. I feel like all rapists should suffer everything horrible under the sun. But death penalty is something that I need to rethink my support of.
@@soyborne.bornmadeandundone1342 Yeah, but as bad a Jordan peterson often is and as dumb as his rhetoric can be (and aggressive as he sometimes is from his detractors), he isn't the worst.
It’s not so weird; the way they arrive at it is pretty bad. Peterson and Rubin argue that the government shouldn’t have the power to execute people because it’s expensive and it gives too much power to the government. Not because the death penalty is vengeance rather than justice, not because an innocent could be killed, not because the justice system could be corrupt. The argument comes at it from a conservative ‘anti big government’ approach to whether the death penalty should be *applied* and not whether the act itself is morally wrong. Let’s say the slow appeal and review process didn’t exist and the cost of the death penalty were to lower. Let’s also say that private prisons could perform executions at their discretion on the advice of a court. These guys would probably agree with allowing the death penalty in that case.
me *weeping hysterically*: "STAPH.... STAAAPPP. HE'S ALREADY DEAD" *the shaun the sentient skeleton is clawed off prager's unconscious body by the krusty burger crew*
@@OhNotThat The sentient skeleton is then put through a lengthy review process after his guilty conviction in which he was assigned the death penalty, he would finally be put to death 23 years later after several reviews.
Honestly, I've watched his stuff so often that just hearing him say "hello everyone" in that exact same tone of voice gives me joy. Like "YES HELLO SHAUN!!!! WE'VE MISSED YOU!" It always signals something awesome is gonna happen.
Do you trust the police? Crowd: "No" Do you trust the justice system? Crowd, more cheerfully: "No!" Do you want death penalty? Crowd, breaks in violence: "Yes!"
privado privado I love when they argue that it costs more to keep them alive (because they all think when you’re sentenced to death they just execute you right away). Because 1. Like you said, it does cost much much more to execute and 2. Even if it did cost more to keep them alive, the fact that some people would be willing to kill potentially innocent people just to save money is disgusting
One of the funniest things to me about the whole argument around the "closure" the death penalty provides is it just makes me wonder if they've ever read a book, watched a movie, a TV show, anything? Revenge and the ultimate failure of vengeance in accomplishing any kind of closure has been a prevailing theme of literary tradition for a very very long time. The loss of a loved one is a very large circular hole and vengeance is a very small square peg that neither naturally fits nor closes the hole in any meaningful way. Vengeance might be inspired by loss, but it by no means sufficiently makes up for it or really makes it any better. Humans have been exploring this for probably thousands of years, yet its still one of the foundational arguments people make for the death penalty.
Right? When the Joker was killed, Batman thought he finally had closure since in this version, he killed his parents. We later find out in the sequels that he still never got over his loss.
Not really. The message is not about revenge being unfulfilling, it’s about it not being worth what the hero sacrificed for it, i.e. personal relationships, a normal life, not having an unhealthy obsession, etc. Even then thinking about these books in social terms helps you understand the context. The morals being pushed in such stories are for the benefit of the society, not the individual.
As someone who lost a non immediate family member to a fairly awful murder, I say let the fucker live, but make his life a hell. Why should he get to just die when he quite literally tortured said person to death? I like the being forced to support the victims idea, but I also do like prisons being used as a poetic justice place- that other inmates treat you depending to severity of your crime, so if you did something truly unforgivable, they will make you wish you were dead. Maybe this is pretty vengeful, but I think in more extreme cases like that, it is fair enough, though that also does require the people investigating their crime to do their job properly/not to abuse their power.
I love Shaun's videos. I frequently re-watch older videos of his just because they're so well-argued and well-thought-out and compassionate. Nobody in the whole video essay game is doing it like him.
The thing with the death penalty is that you can never truly be 100% sure of a person's guilt. There have been so many cases of people being found innocent after they were already put to death.
I am questioning though, what if the killer has images and footage of their victims, and it shows the accused of committing the crime? It's all very tricky..
I was slightly on the pro-death side of the argument before this video. Never has a TH-cam video so quickly changed my mind about something. Good work Shaun.
You're lucky. Hell... We're lucky... This dumb ass site default tries to push you into a alt right direction before it points you in a left wing direction... Makes sense though... TH-cam is pretty corporate and that's how that goes...
@@soyborne.bornmadeandundone1342 to be fair, it's kind of even sadder than that? TH-cam itself is very corporate but most of the engineers working on it probably aren't. They really just wanted to have a system that helps people find what's relevant to their interests. Unfortunately big data ends up encoding and reflecting society as it is, and that includes a lot of horrible beliefs and behaviours. Any system that's even as basic as like/dislike ends up encoding racism, sexism, anti-leftism, etc. So if anything it's too much faith in humanity using their product, which... yeah feels even sadder than something deliberately constructed to boost right wing views. Right at the start TH-cam recommendations were basically just a most watched high score board. Obviously view count wasn't a good metric, those lists ended up pretty static most of the time. Then they started being simplistically based around keywords, which people ended up learning how to game quite quickly as a form of SEO. Then they were like, okay what if it's based on videos that get the most comments and people hitting like and stuff? And mix in some topic matching based on people's history? And interest matching works great for... video games, old cars, stuff that can be pretty neutral like that (though by all means aren't guaranteed to be - look at the whole PewDiePie mess and all of the people who got sucked into the "alt-right pipeline" through him, as ~the algorithm~ adapts and PewDiePie himself becomes a "topic", as enough of people's watch habits cluster around him...). For politics, activism, history, etc... it's a fuckin mess. These programs can't distinguish between tone or opinions, just.... topics. Vaguely defined, poorly categorised, ever-morphing "topics". And when the right is happy to churn out misinformation at a breakneck pace and the left values fact-checking and being thorough and logically consistent... the right wing stuff easily outweighs the left wing stuff. Misinformation and conspiracies can always outnumber refutations and debunkings, they're just easier to cook up. So it's inevitable for someone to get recommended a right wing take EVENTUALLY on one of these various topics, which even watching video games can suck you into being classified as interested in due to various personalities, sooner or later, as the higher quality and left wing content all gets used up and watched already. And that's assuming the person even started out from a left wing position themself! If they were already partway to the right, that in itself is also encoded in their watch history and their likes and dislikes, with a big enough dataset. And it's even easier for them to fall into that hole. It fuckin sucks that designing a program to try and adapt and gauge people's interests ends up reinforcing all preexisting societal bigotries... but it's inevitable so long as society is ugly. We know now that such algorithmic systems are a bad idea. But I don't think there could've been any way to know that from the outset. After all, the idea that you could successfully encode complex relationships and ideas with simply a critical mass of data, with no real structure to it... that was science fiction, pure theory, for a long time. We still scoff at ideas like "the computer gained so much knowledge that it became conscious"... but now we know that "it gained so much knowledge it became racist" is... actually realistic. And sadly inevitable. It's not conscious, still, it has no idea of the ways these relationships of concepts are affecting the world... but the computer program is able to highly successfully replicate those patterns. Now, can we say TH-cam the company is complicit now that we have observed all the terrible effects? Yes absolutely. It's continuing to use this system and merely trying to tweak it to make it less politically troublesome. But again since it only knows about topics... now any video talking about various topics gets demonetised and subsequently devalued in the algorithm... which hurts the people speaking out against the issues far more than it hurts the people making the issues in the first place. Very hamfisted bullshit. And do I think the engineers shouldn't just go along with management telling them to just tweak things? I do. But I do also recognise that a lot have families and quitting or being fired for noncompliance is a really easy way to get evicted and harm your kids in Silicon Valley. So I think they should try to work at a different company instead of just quitting, practically speaking. And hell some other companies would be even worse to work at like Facebook. Topic matching is just sooo naive and limited. On Spotify or SoundCloud, if you only listen to music, it works well at telling what musical styles you like. But if you like hip-hop, it can't differentiate between the progressive artists and the regressive ones... any stuff with lyrics in it might suddenly be odious. And if you use those services to listen to podcasts? Then that's almost as bad as TH-cam. I checked out a few very specific episodes of specific series by Vox and The Guardian and started getting recommended stuff by The Telegraph... (which is a right wing newspaper in the UK, supports all the cruelty disabled people are put through by the benefits system, all the cruelty immigrants and asylum seekers are put through, etc etc). And I'm like ugh!! One of the podcasts was called "fix recessions by giving people money" meaning everybody, like a UBI kind of thing, and some recommendations were other podcasts advocating the opposite basically... to fix recessions by revoking the welfare state... because they both have the same kind of topic, use a lot of the same words... they're presumably marked news or politics or whatever in the podcast genre thing.... it's so ridiculous that companies are still pushing this kind of stuff and investors are still eagerly paying huge sums to continue to make systems like this. And let's not even touch the systems that claim to predict someone's propensity to crime by the same methods!!!!
There is actually a computer-generated video that looks almost identical. The movement is less fluid. Of course to put it in perspective, the people that developed it spent as much time on this one 30 second clip as the typical movie required. Not an easy thing to do, but not long ago it would have been impossible.
1.There is no credible proof that the death penalty works as a deterrent. In the US, in states where the death penalty has been abolished, there has been no significant change in the rates for serious criminal offenses, such as murder. 2. It is a cruel and unusual punishment, where basic standards of human dignity are compromised or undermined. It continues the cycle of violence. Retribution is just another word for revenge-it is essentially just a form of the flawed thinking that two wrongs can make a right. The pro argument is that killing people is wrong; therefore, you should kill people for killing, which makes no sense. . . 3. It affects the poorer segments of society and racial minorities disproportionately, in part because they cannot afford the costs of good legal support. In the USA, although only 13% of the population is African-American, 50% of death row prisoners are African-American. 4. The justice system is bound to make mistakes. In the case of people who are wrongly imprisoned, they can be released from prison and given compensation, but a wrongful execution can never be righted. 5. The death penalty is not cost-effective. When all the practical and legal costs are taken into account, it is clear that the execution is more expensive than imprisoning for life. 6. A life spent in prison is a worse punishment than an execution. A life sentence prisoner has many years to endure their punishment, as well as experience remorse and reflect on his or her crimes. of law enforcement officials. The abolition of the death penalty occurs most often in states where the murder of police officers is a very low percentage of all homicides. In 2014, there were 14,000 murders that took place in the United States, but there were only 35 executions that took place. 7. It is used to control political messages. The United States uses the death penalty exclusively for the punishment of crimes as defined by legal code and precedent. It is a principle which is not consistent for other countries in the world. 78% of global executions because of capital punishment come from just four countries when excluding China: Iraq, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. 8. Family members of a victim are adversely impacted by the death penalty. The Marquette Law Review found that when family members go through the capital punishment process after someone they love becomes a victim, they have higher levels of mental, physical, and behavioral health problems when compared to when the perpetrator receives a sentence of life in prison. Although this issue does not happen in every circumstance, some family members can feel responsible for the fact that the government is putting this criminal to death. Proponents would argue that capital punishment provides relief because it guarantees that person can no longer harm another, but there are many families who do not feel a sense of satisfaction with this action. If they are the ones who experience loss, then there should be a way to provide input for them. There are very few prison escapes that occur, and fewer that involve violent criminals. 9. The number of escapes from prison in the United States declined by more than 50% between 1998-2013, falling to a rate of 10.5 escapes per 10,000 prisoners in 2013. At the same time, the number of life sentences handed out by the court system has gone up by 500%. Most of the incidents that contribute to a prisoner escape come from low-security situations, like when 16 prisoners walked away from a work site and another 3 disappeared from a community work center. Out of all of the reported escapes in 2013, only one inmate from a secured facility was able to get away. Some countries, including Sudan and Iran, use the death penalty as a political tool. It becomes a way to punish political opponents who might want to take their country in a different direction. There were a total of 2,500 death sentences recorded in 54 countries in 2018, with about 20,000 people currently under sentence around the world at the end of the year. 10. Children are sometimes put to death through the use of capital punishment. There are at least 97 kids who were put to death by capital punishment laws in Iran since 1990. Another 145 child executions have happened in China, the Republic of Congo, Pakistan, Sudan, South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria - and the United States. Scott Hain, Toronto Patterson, T.J. Jones, Napoleon Beazley, Gerald Mitchell, Shaka Sankofa, Glen McGinnis, and Steven Roach were all put to death in the United States for a crime that they committed at age 17. Sean Sellers was executed when he was 29 for a crime that he committed when he was 16. 11. The evidence obtained to justify the death penalty is sometimes tainted. There are specific guidelines in the United States today that limit how and when law enforcement can obtain evidence during questioning. This structure of protection is not always available around the world. There are numerous people executed after being convicted during an unfair trial, often on the basis of evidence or confessions obtained through the use of torture. Some defendants were not given adequate legal representation. Some countries even use the death penalty as a mandatory punishment for specific offenses, which means the judge cannot consider the circumstances of the crime during the sentencing phase of a trial. 12. More focus on Rehabilitation for serious offenders murderers, rapists, pedophiles, abusers, and drug dealers Is more effective to reintegrate them back into society and also get them a job however not everyone can be rehabilitated and that's what maximum-security prison is for the keep them away from the Society but still treat them like human beings NOT like animals take away their freedom not their Humanity. Norway prove this its recidivism rate is 20% in Germany it's 40% in Japan 48% the United States full on punishment prison (with zero Rehabilitation) recidivism rate is 76.6%
"More focus on Rehabilitation for serious offenders murderers, rapists, pedophiles, abusers, and drug dealers Is more effective" I don't think that dealing drugs is a serious crime. It's true that drug cartels commit horrible crimes and most of the money made from selling drugs never ends up in a good place but drug dealers are just the expendable tunnel rats and often times addicted themselves or just need money. I would even argue that drug dealers are doing their business more responsibly than most international corporations.
@@4cps777 Agreed. The problem with Cartels isn't the drugs - its the violence, extortion and abductions that go along with maintaining their business. If dealing drugs was a legal profession those crimes wouldn't happen in the vast majority of cases.
Can you name one innocent person who was executed in the last 20 years in the US? The only names you gave were of people who were actually guilty of murder. I thought you were worried about an innocent man being executed
I discovered this channel after watching hbomberguy on the recommendation of my 20 year old grandson! He was pleased that I have enjoyed Harris’s channel and yours. Keep taking on the frightening false narrative of the far right!!
The bit with lobster boy and his good friend rave doobin did actually make some sense. It is pricey to put some one down through the legal system. But that's just about the only thing he said there that was spot on lol... Shame he didn't do the right thing and talk about how we need to reform criminals and the mentally disadvantaged instead of killing them/locking them up forever... But Lobster boy isn't there to help people, but rather make himself rich, so of course he didn't go there lol...
My moral stance on the death penalty is pretty simple: Yes, some people deserve to die for their heinous acts, but that doesn't mean any person should be given the right to murder them*. Because that's what execution is, really, just state-approved murder. And I find disturbing that a country of people so obsessed with civil liberties (to the point of endangering everyone around them just because they feel they should have the right to do so) still approves of the ultimate form of government control, the ability to take life in cold blood. *obviously self defense or the immediate defense of others are a totally different set of circumstances
![ลองสุ่มไอโฟน 990 โกงมั้ย? [ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.101 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bfsWe0j492k/mqdefault.jpg)
![[TH] 2024 PMGC League | Survival Stage วันที่ 1 | PUBG MOBILE Global Championship](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FVFT-PFwU80/mqdefault.jpg)
DNA evidence is also a lot less bulletproof than a lot of people (and juries) think: false positives do happen, and when they do they happen to people whose DNA is already in the police system for whatever reason - usually because they've been previously arrested. It's really difficult to convince a jury of a false positive, or to get people to think about the fact that if police disproportionately stop and arrest, say, black people, they will be much more likely to get misidentified by the DNA evidence.
Philosophy Tube almost as if the justice system is more concerned about finding someone to blame rather than delivering justice
I recommend looking up the "Phantom of Heilbronn".
Plus, DNA is fragile and getting good samples is difficult.
it is also difficult to get enough DNA for a proper test, as confirmed by all the DNA test videos where people struggle to gather enough spit
Definitely. I’m in undergrad forensic psych right now, but fortunate enough to work with folks who are doing amazing research in this area (stuff coming out of UNSW right now is absolutely brilliant) and in particular on how juries interpret forensic evidence. It’s scary, both how unreliable the majority of forensic evidence is, and how much juries trust it. We’ve got a long way to go in terms of gatekeeping the quality of forensic evidence that makes it into courtrooms, and changing the public perception of forensic evidence as ‘scientifically infallible,’ to start addressing the issue of juries falsely convicting based on poor-quality forensic evidence. It’s depressing stuff.
The only good thing about PragerU is that it occasionally brings out Shaun to talk about it.
And the ytps
@@notrod5341 This school is now cambodian.
Kaza ddum hi
Comrade Cora Hello, mother of all ytps
@@kazaddum2448
I'm going to transport you to the wonders of genocide.
Theres something malicious about describing prisons as "caring for" people, particularly in the US.
@⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ Too bad red states already do that when they vote in people like Trump. Nice victim blaming for drug addicts though. Muh states rights
People in prison usually aren't actively harmed by agents of the prison; they just suffer from preventable suffering at the hands of isolation, illness, fellow inmates, etc. This is exactly how conservatives propose the government should care for its citizens, so you have to recognize the ideological consistency.
@@timothymclean agents of prisons do actively harm prisoners. They antagonize, plant contraband, torture (segregated confinement especially), sell drugs, etc. U.S. prisons have guards that are sometimes just as bad, if not worse than some of the prisoners.
@@TheAgent0060 I'm not sure what fraction of inmates actually suffer that...which is a weak justification for my joke at the expense of conservative governments.
(Though to be fair, in practice conservative governments/institutions _do_ do/have done everything you said, more or more often than liberal ones.)
@⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ call me malicious then. I'd pick anyone out of any prison in the world as more deserving of care than you.
"I bet if your wife/daughter was murdered, you'd want them dead"
Of course I would. In the heat of the moment, I wouldn't call the police because I would want to torture them for as long as possible. But what does it say about your position that I'd have to be severely emotionally compromised to agree with it?
If somebody physically hurt my wife or daughter in any way, I would want them dead. That doesn't mean it's right obviously
We are talking about severely emotionally compromising situations.
gotta love that lost sentence
I'm sure there's other situations where you'd want to kill someone too, if you could get away with it. Just because you want it doesn't make it right.
Seriously. Not to mention I’m one flawed human. Shouldn’t the justice system aspire to more than that? There’s a reason I wouldn’t be allowed to prosecute my wife’s killer, or be the judge or sit on the jury.
Praeger: "I want the death penalty because of my feelings"
Shaun: "Facts don't care about your feelings."
Præger
oh jesus here we go again skeptic community 2 electric boogaloo
Mike White The thing is, the right doesn't care about the facts. That's why you can't spell conservative without "con".
@@PopMusicKiller Pick one mate. Either the entire right wing or cuckservatives.
*
That's the fist time I've ever heard anyone refer to *prison sentence* as _"being cared for."_
Its a thing down here in a south that prisoners are being treated way to good and that we need to do as much as we can to make prisoners lives hell because then they won't want to go to prison and won't commit crimes.
Edit: I keep getting replies about how this is wrong. Yes this is wrong. This is immoral and is not the way prisons should work. In my opinion every person should have every option to be reformed and if they can not be then prison should not be a punishment but rather a place to reform and if that fails to hold those who can't reenter the society in a humain and just place with no illwill for we are all human.
@@ramblingsofadash5159 That is such a terrible idea that it boggles the mind that anyone would even come up with that...
@@ramblingsofadash5159 All that is an argument for torture and abuse by state authorities. Who do you want to give that power to? Oh right the same government you say is to big, corrupt and untrustworthy.
@@greatandmightykevin In theory, if you make prison such a hellish experience, then shouldn't it reduce recidivism as well as deter any would be offenders? However, in practice, this doesn't work one bit. The prisons are hellish enough to dehumanise the inmates, but they are not Nazi concentration camp levels of horrendous. For this to work, one would need to make prison so awful that convicts would prefer a bullet to the back of the head rather than be incarcerated there. However, I don't think that any sane person would ever want to actually implement such a system, because it would be grossly injurious to society as a whole. Think about the types of people you would have staffing such a prison... or the types of people who would want to work there. These aren't people whom you want to be numerous in your community!
That said, an intelligent approach would be to spend more on rehabilitating former prisoners--and to help them find gainful employment after serving out their sentences. The idea of harsh prisons deterring would-be offenders is absurd since the people who are deterred by current prisons _are not likely to commit crimes anyway_. Most criminals don't plan on being caught, and for them, crime does pay (until they are caught).
Thats because propagandists like him will change their arguments and their descriptions about the exact same things just to fit the narrative they are peddling.
I lost my Dad to reckless vehicular homicide. In the immediate aftermath I was raging with grief and anger. If you had put the young person responsible within my reach in those moments I cannot guarantee I would have contained myself. I imagine that pain would be dialed to 11 in the case of first or second degree murder,
Which makes what Prager is doing so appalling to me. He’s drafting grieving survivors into his argument, using our grief as borrowed ammunition and our pain as rhetorical armor. He asked death penalty opponents to put themselves in our shoes without ever asking us whether we are still using them.
I got hit by a motorcycle once, as much as I want to kill that guy, I don't think killing literally everyone is a good thing.
To quote Batman: It always starts with one, that is the justification that everyone always use.
Sorry for your lost
Exactly. They think the death penalty provides “closure” of some kind. It’s nothing but another grift. “Closure” doesn’t exist, but there sure are a lot of people who try to sell it to those who are hurting 😔
@@Pretermit_Sound Thanks for saying that, you're right. Closure does not exist. The death of a loved one is a wound that does not close.
I agree it never brings closure and we should try to leave feelings out of it. Death penalty does deter people from committing those crimes though.
Gacy "the killer clown" did not beg for death penalty, he claimed innocence till death, feigning insanity along other things and his last words were "kiss my ass". Peterson is very incorrect.
Yeah, he was thinking of Ed Kemper who requested the death penalty.
Ed Kemper is also one of 4 US serial killers that turned themselves in while admitting regret (to varying degrees) about what they've done.
Ed Kemper, Wayne Adam Ford, Mack Ray Edwards, and Ricardo Silvio Caputo.
Mack Ray Edwards also requested the death penalty, complained about the wait being too long, and killed himself soon after conviction. I think he would've been more fitting for Peterson's nonsense argument.
@@MikkiManson13 Keep in mind Kemper has a genius level IQ and excels at manipulating people though, so take it with a grain of salt.
When has he ever been correct about anything though?
@@tilltronje1623 I mean, I think he is correct that the state shouldn't be granted the power to execute people. But I agree with your sentiment though... I don't think he's right about much.
@@albertjordan3249 Even a broken clock strikes right sometimes.
Summary:
1. You can mistakenly kill innocents.
2. It's more costly than prison for life.
3. It doesn't even provide closure to most relatives of the victims.
4. And it doesnt really deter crime
5. It prevents criminal rehabilitation
6. Saved money from less expensive lifetime imprisonment can go to many other better programs
7. The state executing prisoners has a slippery slope when protesters can be arrested.
@@sandshark2
In summary it's a much safer bet to put them in jail than gamble with there execution
@@augustuzmoon3814 yeah basically
@@cibo889 the cost for the lawyers, execution style, pay for the officers who kill the person, and the resulting clean up costs around $3 million per death. Compre that with holding that same person alive for their entire life in a prison to say, 85 years old, and thats at most $1-2 million considering medical bills
I used to be pro-death penalty. It's quite humbling to know that a weird skull with sunglasses can change your mind in a 40 minute video
He's not weird. He's beautiful
I’m glad that you were able to set aside your own biases and listen to a different perspective. Not many people are willing to do that.
@adam riddle what's embarrassing about being open minded?
Not going to lie, despite being pro death penalty(still am, mostly due to the fact that I come from a country that uses the death penalty, and has managed to maintain Low crime rates in it), I found Prager’s argument really idiotic
Like sure science can lead to finding the culprit but it’s not a hundred 100% guarantee, it’s a high chance of success not a perfect chance of success
Furthermore, the death of a person should not be given out so easily either, the reason the death penalty is called Capital Punishment is because it’s supposed to be the most severe sentence a person can receive, which means it should be reserved for cases which are the most severe, and the most extreme
I wouldn’t call the death penalty morally good, but it’s a (usually) good deterrent of crime
But once again, the death penalty causes a lot of collateral damage and problems which is why i believe it should only be used in situations whereby it concerns the order of the country
All in all, even though I still support the death penalty, I am not as headstrong about it as compared to before I watched the video, and it certainly did help me reconsider my bases as to why and how
I am fully prepared to receive hate for this comment, and coming by a guy who believes Jurors aren’t a good way to declare verdicts, I probably do for my own insensitivity
But, yea, I do agree it is humbling to see how this video helped me change my mind a bit
I liked the comment above mine
My view on the death penalty: it's not something I like much, but I think it should be used on the most serious crimes like murder and rape. Of course, I'd want all the safeguards before conducting the death (mostly, law must ensure 100% that the accused committed the crime)
I'd still want life in prison over death penalty but it is more costly to the average citizen. I see death penalty as punishment, not as a way of preventing other crimes
Maybe a combination of both would be the best. But still, death penalty should only be reserved for the most serious of crimes
Criminals need to think 2 times before committing a crime. If they consider the aftermath and see 10 years or 20 years in prison a price they're willing to pay... But almost no one wants to die for a petty less crime.
Oh and I need to make this very clear, I believe in rehabilitation. But I don't think terrorism, murder (some cases) and rape should deserve rehabilitation. But for the other crimes, capital punishment should be illegal
Denis’ implication that the prison system is someone getting “cared for” is deeply bizzare when one considers how awful prison can be even for people who receive far lesser sentences than any murderer would.
Honestly, if they cared as much about freedom as they say they do, they'd realise just how brutal a punishment denial of freedom for an indeterminate length of time is.
@@Quintinohthree i mean.. its intended purpose and what it is do to how its run are two different things, the Prison system by its nature is meant to better a person and incorporate him back into society after a while, that however fails in many countrys for a multitude of reasons(US for example having for profit prisons which is a sick abomination of the idea behind prisons as a whole), and to the second point of "being a brutal punishment" thats the point....you commited something that, acording to society makes you unable to be free, (which leads to a funny situation in my country germany where, as the right to seek freedom is untouchable as a basic right, the Right to BE free is not, and can thus be revoked via prison sentences, however you are still free to seek freedom, thus a prisonbreak in itself is perfectly legal here.. if you dont commit any crimes doing so)
Conservatives don't believe you're entitled to food, water, shelter, or medicine, so getting all of those things for free is being cared for to them.
those arguments are only made by people who have never stepped foot in a correctional facility or talked with an incarcerated person.
@clam its not realy about "philosophy" but with the exact reason the prison system(as most countries we consider "democratic" have implemented) exist for.(it was litteraly revolutionary at the time to use emprisonment as punihsment instead of a holding before trial(and then likely execution)..) the main goal of a prison(which btw also is called correctional facility among other similiar names) is exactly what its secondary name implies...to be a facility for the correction of people who commited crimes and preparing them for reincorporation in society, sure depending on the crime its unlikely that the reincorporation will ever actualy take place,that dosnt change the theoretical purpose of the facility however
I've been pulled over and asked if I smoked weed and after saying no over and over again, they checked my car and "found" a blunt roller in my car (it literally had the words "blunt roller" on it. If it didn't say that on there, I would not have known what it was at all) and arrested me for having weed residue. Mind you, I was initially pulled over for speeding. Cops will do whatever to fill out their quotas.
thats america for ya
quotas are stupid. that literally means cops won't try hard to solve anything 'cause they need money, just like everyone else. and then they arrest innocents...
I write 'blunt roller' on all my joints, it's the best way to keep a detailed inventory of my doobie cigarettes and pot needles /s
Yeah a couple years ago I was buying weed and picking up my friend when I got t-boned by some asshole running a stop sign. I was terrified they were going to try and pin everything on me if they saw it
I don't think police have quotas in that way
Does the death penalty prevent crime? No.
Have innocent people been executed? Yes.
How the debate ever gets beyond this point baffles me.
The American prison system is a ready way to further harm and dehumanize some of the most vulnerable members of our society. The average American is ok that our system is punishment based not reform based. There are mulitple beneficial reasons to change our system. But that would require admitting that there is a problem that needs to be changed.
The solution to this is to ensure that anybody involved in executing wrongfully convicted prisoners also receives the death penalty. This will encourage law enforcement and the judiciary to be thorough, their life will depend on it.
@@Roy-ts9nv yeah and the people who decide if the judiciary are thorough enough should also be threatened with the death penalty, lest they make a mistake and execute an innocent judge, and the people who judge the judges of the judiciary should be threatened as well. Actually let's just give everyone spiked clubs and let you kill anyone who does something you don't like that would be rad as hell
@@Kraafft Hey! That's just our justice system in a nut shell!
Innocent people are 20 years in prison. It may be worse than death pentaly.
I just thought about the potential psychological harm from misidentifying the killer of your loved one, getting an innocent person executed, and then later finding out that not only were you wrong, but the real killer committed several more murders after the fact.
Not really addressing your point here, just felt like saying that I would still hate more to be the guy who was fooled by a mass murderer into confessing you were the murderer, being put to death by the state falsely for the murder of your wife and child, while their murderer went on to kill. That is like, beyond one of the most fucked up fates.
Not to mention the psychological torture of being wrongfully in death row.
And the families of the innocent executed people! I can't imagine how traumatizing that would be and this would haunt them for life, knowing that your loved one was murdered by the state.
sounds like a great script for a book or movie
@@rpl1318 You havs any interest in fiction writing?
Conservatives: Facts don't care about feelings.
Also conservatives: But how do you _feel_ about death penalty?
@@agamemnonofmycenae5258 Bruh, you're supposed to put a space after commas and full stops. Your comment is unreadable.
Agamemnon of Mycenae “i dont care what other alphabet people do with their personal lives. The moment... they start enforcing their ridiculous demands and doctor the language...”
Maybe your feelings are hurt that the things youre comfortable with, are being made more inclusive to people that youd rather not have to acknowledge... 🙄
Agamemnon of Mycenae howre you gonna use gay marriage to bolster your argument? It became legal 5 years ago ffs. And conservatives lost their minds over a wedding cake
@@agamemnonofmycenae5258 "Last I checked, gays have not lost their right to marry"
Dude, gays _only just_ gained the right to marry.
@@dmoneyonair it was more that everyone had a go at the christian bakers for not wanting to make a cake for 2 gay men, but its fine for muslims to do so because its in their religion. It was a double standard.
"“Deserves it! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement." - Gandalf
always get chills when i read this.
Gandalf speaking fax
I quoted this the other day but attributed it to Paris Hilton. People weren't happy.
@@maxsync183 Hahaha, it really tells a tale, ain't it?
I also was reminded of this quote while watching the video
Dennis prager seems to have justice confused with revenge.
Not to be dense, but indulge me: Why is it so hard to see that vengeance can be a factor in justice?
@@aaronwalterryse4281 it is a huge part of the justice system, but I think most people just don't see an issue with that
So do those "leftist" in those riots.
@@aaronwalterryse4281 um I agree that revenge is what some want but thats not right in the long run. We all like to put ourselves in the shoes of the victim but what we dont stop and think about is would we want someone or others trying to get revenge on our loved ones? Most people in my opinion who are for the death penalty only are thinking about getting even or pay back but are not looking at this as a whole. You're desire for revenge actually has a negative effect on many people. The people carrying tge execution out and the family of tge executed are examples.
@@aaronwalterryse4281 I think it comes from the thought that revenge isn't always comparable to the crime and also if mouring people would choose the way person will punished it can turn into eye for an eye, torure or again- class discrimination, when a person does theft from a big corporation, because they have no money for example for food or child support and company could say "i want that person to be killed, because that would be a sing to other people not to steal from us". That can be called revenge, because it brings satisfaction to the victim.
Maybe people could fight for emotional damage money (for example someone stole the only thing that reminded me from my granma), but I think it's dangerour to turn justice system into legal revenge machine.
I like the new picture. Imagine you're walking leisurely on a lovely springtime meadow. Suddenly you notice a bespectacled skull lying on the ground and it starts lecturing you on the death penalty.
"So anyway I started debunking the Death Penalty"
I want to see this episode of Joe Rogan
"strangely, not the weirdest thing ive seen today"
@@aturchomicz821
And then he got sentenced to death and that's why he's a skull
And it just happens to have some really rad sunglasses
Shaun: "we can't raise the dead"
Also Shaun: ** is a talking skull **
the dark side of the force is a pathway to many powers that many deemed, unnatural
Technicality: Posts a comment in meme format
Me: smh - I forgot Alex is a zoomer. 🤦
(😛)
He's not a raised dead, he's a lingering spirit. It's a fine but important distinction.
Lain bair the hypocrisy of the left
Smh my head
A talking skull laying on the ground, though.
PragerU: "We need god because without god, the value of life is sacred no longer"
Also PragerU: "Why don't you let me kill this dude? I really fucking hate him, don't you think I should be allowed to do it?"
To be fair, the Christian god definitely is pro-murder (as long as he’s the one doing it of course).
@@ineffablecraving8697 either way his life-protecting argument backfires
But wanting logical cohesion out of Prager is like trying to nail an omelette to a wall.
Yeah, obviously conservatives are admitting they would murder anyone who mildly annoyed them if they thought they could get away with it.
That's not very Christian of you, Mr Prager!☝️
😂😂😂
Prager describing U.S. prisoners life as "being cared for" tells you everything you need to know about him
George Zakhia conservatives think just being fed and kept alive is “being cared for”.
@@schmittywerbenjagermanjens2649 Plantation owners in the 1800s made the same argument to justify slavery.
r2b2ct1 Frightening how apt that comparison is.
to Dennis The Menace, baseline survival is a privilege, not a right. so being treated any better than the worst that is psychically possible is "being taken care of". but he probably runs his own personal torture dungeon, so...
I mean, technically... But not well, not at all actually.
I know this appeals more to the emotional argument side but I firmly believe prisons shouldn't be strictly punishment in the first place. They should be rehabilitation centers. If a person who's committed awful crimes and can be rehabilitated, that makes the world safer. And if a person genuinely can't adapt and rehabilitate, how much of that is in their control? If they are mentally beyond saving they should be kept away from others but still treated as human
Honestly that's an only logical statement. Punishment over rehabilitation only further causes people to funnel back into the prison system which costs more and more money. Rehabilitative prisons have been shown to produce functioning members of society while punishment base only further isolates vulnerable people. Punishment based prison sentences are not only cruel, ineffective and costly but they are completely counterproductive. But people rather live out their revenge fantasies then help those who need help most
ven that does a better way to deal with crime, sure some people are just evil/vile in general no matter what you do and need to be put in bars, but rehabilitations is general a better system with punishment being a last resort, then what we have.
Free will advocates incoming!! Baten down the hatches!
I can’t stand ricky gervais these days but he did make a moving argument against the death penalty on a podcast once. Not verbatim here, but “i dont think a state can claim to be moral in punishing bad deeds when the punishment itself is undeniable cruelty and harm”. When it comes to non emotional arguments i stand by the “one wrongful execution is too many”.
I don't think this appeals to emotion AT ALL. The fact of the matter is, that most criminals are going to be released sooner or later. who the fuck benefits from them being punished in the mean time?
If you comitted a crime because you lack self-controll, being put into a rigid systhem where you have no way to exercise any controll to begin with won't change anything about that.
If you committed a crime out of desperation being pulled out of society and brand-marked a criminal is only going to make you more desperate.
If you commited a crime because of bad influences being cooped up for years if not decades with other criminals and in direct opposition to the police is only going to increase that influence.
A system that removes criminals from the other pressures and gives them a chance to reflect, readjust and actually reenter society armed with the tools and support that lets you flourish in it without resorting to crime is the only logical thing.
"Criminals should be punished" is the emotional argument as it boils down to "I want the bad person to suffer" Punishing criminals isn't about justice or about helping anyone. Which is why it doesn't. It's about revenge.
Jordan Peterson saying "John Wayne Gacy, you don't wanna know about him" as if he's not one of the most high-profile serial killers of all time is so funny
For Americans, yes, but as a Brit myself, even though I have lived in the US for many years, I don't know anything about him other than that he is a serial killer.
@@EnglishMike He's a Canadian talking to an American. If I was talking to a British person, I wouldn't bring up a prolific British serial killer from the past century in a way that implies that I'm super smart for knowing who it is. It's just an example of Peterson sounding like his smug-ass self that I found amusing.
@@bootlegpersona8204 Ah, yes, I see. My mistake.
@@bootlegpersona8204 Peterson is so painfully smug it hurts my actual brain.
Who the fuck is John Wayne Gacy though? As an Australian born in Britain... I have absolutely no idea who that is.
Additionally, with the “loved ones need a sense of justice” argument, there’s much better ways to go about this. Restorative Justice programs have been shown to reduce victim’s PTSD rates significantly and also help with recidivism. They’re just not popular because they’re ‘soft’.
Could you link some sources on this? This looks interesting
@@r-9aarrowhead829 Warning, I have not read the full report, it's cited in my notes from studying, but Sherman and Strang (2007) is apparently the most significant study into it.
www.iirp.edu/pdf/RJ_full_report.pdf
With conservatives you mean. On the whole, they just can't seem to be able to embrace any kind of 'soft' approach, no matter the evidence.
Talking about this "closure for the friends" in pure selfish terms of "healing", "reducing PTSD" and being able to resume a comfy happy life after your friend has been slaughtered, isn't necessarily what people are always talking about.
Yes but yo have to remember you're making this argument with conservatives. People who generally don't believe in psychology, psychiatry and these days not even medicine or any research that contradicts their bias.
The weird thing is, I've heard all the components of this argument, but never seen them together as a coherent argument against the death penalty. I didn't expect to have my mind in the subject changed in the first 10-15 minutes of a 40-minute video, but here we are.
Well, a video can be persuasive if you get bombarded suddenly with arguments you haven't heard articulated a certain way before (before you get a chance to consider and think of counter-arguments). But, be sure to mull it over and scrutinise it. I say this as someone who is against the death penalty, but still advocates for people to be convinced of their standpoint for the right reasons (whatever their conclusion).
Reading Victor Hugo's book (last day of a condemned person or something like that would probably be the english title) really gave me an understanding as to why the death penalty needs to be abolished and stay abolished.
Not saying you're not allowed to disagree, just for me it's pretty clear
@@teergeret Could you summarize his argument?
I hold the opinion that capital punishment is beneficial to the purpose of a safer society and provides a certain amount of deterrence. Also, enacting the punishment is a strict procedural matter. It's no different than, say, a police officer writing out a parking ticket because you violated a local traffic code. There is no 'state murdering people', it's just the logical consequence of breaking certain laws; the state has no agency whatsoever.
Concerning the deaths of innocents: it should be weighted against the pros of permanently removing dangerous members from society.
@@GQ2593 they are already removed from society by being put in prison. Executing them is just a riskier, permanent, feel-good alternative to life in prison.
@@GQ2593 it boils down to something like "if it's only to remove them from society, why not lock them up for life. If it's for revenge, in what way is the society killing someone better than the killer himself. And I think he also has a funny little cartoon where the guy leading a criminal to the guillotine is lead to one himself and that cycle pretty much repeats itself forever ^^
The death penalty isnt justice, it's revenge.
Being "cared for" in a prison for the rest of your life is not as pleasant as pro death penalty advocates would have you believe.
Life imprisonmemt is undoubtedly the worst punishment one could endure. Anyone who values freedom as highly as right-wingers say they do should agree.
Everyone going nuts in quarantine seems to prove this point.
@@petra1995 People in quarantine at least have their own home to sit in and do anything they want. A person in prison for life will never again have the same freedoms as a person on the outside.
@@devonmolina5200 Which is exactly the point, I believe. People are going stir-crazy while staying in (presumably) far nicer conditions than prison, so if those same people got a life imprisonment, they would be even worse off.
People usually point to inmates being offered TVs and stuff. But like, if you stole a couple of hundreds of quids worth of stuff and nobody was hurt. You're sent to prison for a couple of years and you are showing remorse for what you've done then let them have a TV. Surely the idea is to say, hey look a nice honest life is good you don't have to resort to robbery to get stuff.
"I don't understand you"
imagine caring about what Dennis Prager does and doesn't understand
If you want to win against the Republicans it would probably help to understand the arguments from the other side instead of dismissing them or just not caring. Which seems weird of you to say considering I care about the left wings view because I either agree or want to convince them of a different view.
The reason the right have been winning so much is because they tend to watch both left and right wing content. That's not the case for most left wing people, who usually only watch left wing content.
@@eaglebearer "most left wing ppl"
Do u have any evidence to back that up?
There are echo chambers on both sides.
Eagle Bearer
I have nothing to add, but what you say seems smart and I’ll think about doing it
@@cody967 Here you go
www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/the-righteous-mind-by-jonathan-haidt.html
theindependentwhig.com/haidt-passages/haidt/conservatives-understand-liberals-better-than-liberals-understand-conservatives/
Also I know you're going find this offensive, but there are also a disproportionate amount of mentally ill people on that left. That's not to say that leftism makes people unwell, but they there are typically more mentally ill people who are attracted to the left. Would you like a citation of that aswell?
@@eaglebearer I care about what working class right wingers do and don't understand but I don't care about what rich right wingers do and don't understand.
I have no reason to believe Dennis Prager *actually* doesn't understand counteraguments, his job and his wealth depends on him not understanding them or pretending not to.
The mistake is when you treat Dennis Prager as if he shares the same interests as the working class people who watch his videos. He does not.
In 8th grade I was writing an essay about why we should use the death penalty, but when doing research for my paper I ended up changing my mind and completely flipped sides for my essay.
That's a pretty heavy topic for someone of...13-14 years of age, I think? How did that happen? Did your teacher assign that subject or did you decide on it yourself?
@@TirOrah I decided the topic. The assignment was we had to write an arguementative essay, but we had to do a lot of research for it and do things like find scholarly articles, annotate articles, find 5 for our stance and 5 against, etc. The main focus was in the information gathering.
@@indiana47 Whoa, that's very cool! I wish they'd given us such an assignment when I was in secondary school! Well, young me probably would've detested it, but something like that can teach you some good skills for later in life.
Thanks for responding!
Actually I had to do this too,it was part of our exam in my native language.
I’m not 100% sure how good of an idea that was,but for me,it helped me gain insight on the matter.
@@TirOrah I'm doing one right now. we're studying the Bill of Rights and debating whether the death penalty goes against the 8th amendment (no cruel or unusual punishment)
Funny how 'pro-life' people like it
I'm a right wing libertarian and would say that I'm pro life in both aspects. I can understand with the general right wing view that if someone murders someone else that criminal has essentially taken someone's rights, so the justice system enacting the same punishment in return makes sense.
It would be nice if Mass shooters, serial killers and pedophiles are killed. But we can't give that power.
is it though?
like, maybe it was funny at some point, I guess
Sky Snow pro-life fo the unborn . pro-death for the living
George Carlin said it best, "Republicans want live babies so they can turn them into dead soldiers."
Pro (life that hasnt committed any wrong doing and hasnt taken anyone's) life , nice try buddy
I read this as “The Death Penalty For PragerU” and honestly prefer that title.
I'd be satisfied with a public flogging with a large sausage.
@@joet3935 Make that sausage primarily from soy for me would you?
@@soyborne.bornmadeandundone1342 i was expecting that we are getting full dutch mob and make ourself cannibals. But yes ,herbivores have a better taste than the other two.
@@alexandrub8786 just don't eat the brain! you'll get prions!
@@kaitlyn__L funny enough i already know that from somewhere ,but is always better to warn than to start with the assumption that might be wrong and have negative results.
P.S.:Thanks for warning.
We need a content warning for “Jordan Peterson says something remotely reasonable”
Think of the adults that could be watching they’re too dumb to handle this type of propaganda!
Yeah, it took me by such a surprise how what he said was so reasonable. I even caught myself nodding along
@@Avi2Nyan That's kinda how he gets so many people. Cleaning your room and the government not executing people are good ideas. Then he trojan horses his bullshit behind it.
@@Kaine667 What bullshit? If you go into his talks knowing that he comes from religion, you'll come out 2-steps-ahead.
@@BlackBoxGamers While I may not be a JP follower, I wouldn't mock people for their religion, even as an atheist myself.
I may be adding a comment to a year old video, but I wanted to get this thought out. Going with the closure argument, if we take into account the idea of an innocent person being wrongly executed the argument becomes even more flimsy from my point of view. I imagine that learning the person you thought killed your loved one(s) and who was executed, was actually innocent would be distressing and even more traumatic.
Definitely. Realizing that the person you fear most has been not only free, but happy. While you wanted and watched an innocent person die.
Ugh
Especially if you were a witness for the prosecution, e.g. giving a false identification or something. The guilt you'd feel would make everything even worse.
Spider-Man 3 moment
Many that live deserve death, and some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo?
.. Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. Even the very wise can not see all ends.
-Gandalf
I came to the comments just to find this
I love that quote
That quote gets a lot more weight if you remember that Tolkien saw trench warfare in WWI. He is not talking in an abstract way. He probably could put a lot of faces to both halves of the first sentence.
Thought that would fit perfectly here
no telepaths in lord of the rings lore? lol
"Keep government out of everything except for abortion because that's murder. Also we need death penalty government can you come in here for a sec?"
Matsuri Mizusawa my favorite part is that people who run on a “pro-life” platform often support the death penalty.
@@iadd2568 Yeah, but don't forget those who oppose that, too.
There are also many who actually do care about both mother and child.
@@xCorvus7x Nah there aren't. There are probably only a bakers dozen of those people who actually care about the mother. The rest of them however undoubtedly don't. They don't support providing pre-natal care to mothers, healthcare to poor mothers, meals and child care for poor mothers and children, basically nothing that would actually improve their lives. They basically only support the state forcing her to give birth.
Of course you can't really say you care about a mother if you also support infringing on her bodily autonomy
@@moosesandmeese969 Pro birth, not pro life. Cause once that baby is born the mother is villainized for daring to be a single mother, and how dare she may need help financially, gotta pull yourself up by your bootstraps, why should anyone get any help. Or "Just put it up for adoption", while the foster system is already so overrun with kids that never end up adopted. Every single person that says adoption rather than abortion should be required to pay for the bills the mother still has the whole time, and then have to adopt at least one of the kids that aren't as likely to be adopted; older, not white, disabled, ect.
@@normandy2501 That's such an amazing way of stating it. Never watched Black Mirror (more of a Handmaid's Tale kinda gal), but those are some interesting observations! Luv from Australia! :)
I absolutely love the point about the inconsistency in the “big government” argument about the police and the military. How is that not big government? To those kinds of people, better healthcare and environmental protections are tyranny. I’ve never understood that.
For some people it's not knowing the concept of possitive vs negative freedom and/or obsession with the latter one.
Than there is also the hyper individualism (Wich leads to people not seeing systemic issues)
Many are just in a contest on treating poor people the worst possible way and holding up supremacy
They don't like it because it helps poor people
It's because the pundits who advocate this kind of shit are paid off by giant conglomerates whose best interests lie in keeping industries like health care privatized.
My aunt (Irish but married an American) is anti taxes and big government. She was complaining about that stuff to my mum one time and my mum replied "Your husband works for the US military. Your entire life is paid for by taxes."
She had no response
The cognitive dissonance is astounding
They just want the poor to subsidize their private security forces while they pocket more ill-gotten gains. And if they aren't wealthy, they got bluepilled by the right-wing media machine.
Catching someone in a contradiction is pretty irrelevant when they are lying about their basis for *both* positions.
I have actually met an ex-cop (big shocker) who had no problem with the death penalty killing a few innocent people along the way because in his mind, they still must have done something bad in their lives to deserve "divine justice", whether or not the state knew about it.
He's not got the wool over his eyes. His entire world is woven out of sheeps' hair
Really weird when you recall Jesus was killed by the state....
@@ThatOliveMrT And that (as seen by the world) for political convenience sake.
Would he feel the same way about cops killed in the line of duty, I wonder.
I used to be in favor of the death penalty...until I got my degree in forensic anthropology. After which, yeah, I get to see exactly how fallible the human element is in employing the forensic tools available.
Like the time a Texas Ranger visited the body farm ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that he had hard photo and video evidence that would get someone sentenced to death.
Long story short, they had received an anonymous tip that someone had murdered, dismembered, and disposed of a body; sent the video in, identified 'who' was in the video. The Ranger just needed an expert to come in to the court explain the gruesome video and convince the jury that 'this is why we'll never find a body.'
The video was a fucking tape showing a Tibetan Skyburial. And the photos were of the same event. The Texas legal system was ready to murder an innocent guy over literal documentary footage from Tibet. If that doesn't reveal the flaws in human judgement, not much will.
(P.S. - The footage was identified correctly. And it was pointed out that Texas lacks both the type of vulture seen as well as lacking the actual hills and mountains covered in grass. I believe the case was immediately, and quietly dropped. I mean, since we didn't hear anything about it. But hey, it's Texas, entirely possible they just locked the innocent guy up anyway.)
I once heard the quip "if corporations are people why has Texas not wrongly executed one yet" and this only further solidifies things for me.
@@OnTheBlank lol what a brilliant line
The deterrent argument:
Many of the most prolific killers who get caught have preferred to take their own lives, rather than spend their lives in prison- indicating that prison is a greater deterrent to a calculating mind.
In recent years this has included both Harold Shipman and Fred West, in terms of serial killers.
For spree killers it has included Michael Ryan, and 16 of the 25 most deadly attacks in the US have seen the perpetrator either kill themselves at the scene- or commit 'suicide by cop'.
To me this seems to be very much an indicator that life imprisonment is significantly more of a deterrent than a death penalty to those with that sort of mind set- even in countries that have no death penalty!
True. On the other hand, people like Myra Hindley kinda enjoyed being the center of attention, despite also wanting to let out of prison. Motivation changed a lot depending on the person. Speaking of, I'm fairly sure every pro death penalty argument in Britain by law has to mention the Moors Murders. Shadow of the rope is a phrase I remember a lot when reading about that case.
@@LadyTylerBioRodriguez Most folks who do such crimes brazenly have absolutely no problem being killed; most kill themselves if they don't get detained. What do you call someone who acts in violence towards another group of individuals without any care or consideration taken to ethics, and most notably, to interpersonal communication and the double empathy problem?
usa foreign policy
@@felicityc Yeah most people who kill repeatedly are not humble. They think they can escape the law everytime. They are too smart to get caught. Death penalty has no impact on these people. People like Harold Shipmen didn't care one bit about getting caught because they never considered that an outcome.
C
H
"That's all from me today, folks."
Yeah, good luck with that one Shaun, I've got Autoplay on.
"So shallow that a dog was able to dig up one of the skulls"
Ah, finally- the Shaun origin story
😂
Imagine murdering a man and burying him in your backyard and when your dog digs his skull out, it starts talking about the death penalty and PragerU
It’s genuinely baffling how well-written and structured these videos are.
Shaun just takes an issue and whittles away at it with laser-beam precision until he’s carved an unnaturally smooth and satisfying sculpture of an idea.
I don’t want to make out that I’m unfamiliar with, you know, good writing. Like this is the best possible thing on offer. There’s a lot of stuff out there, but there’s also an overwhelming amount of trash that we all kind of accept as “good enough” because it’s the best that most of us can to manage to create and engage with given how busy we all are, and how many kinds of thoughts and events and opinions are demanding our attention.
This is functionally flawless. The bits where flaws are unavoidable are left on the cutting room floor, and you have only this incredibly relaxing experience of a video that just exclusively makes sense.
This is what you learn to do late in High school and all the time in University.
@@Themadhorse yeah maybe in a country that doesn't end with United and end with States
YES. It feels like he writes his videos as a puzzle, as in, every word NEEDS to be there.
I had similar thoughts watching this one, even though I already knew and agreed with all of the arguments Shaun uses individually, seeing them put together so completely and seamlessly, and the little gotchas about Jordan Peterson disagreeing with Mr Prager, were all so pleasing.
As I had all of these thoughts, a phrase entered my mind.... "getting owned by facts and logic".... I felt a bit dirty having that realisation, but at least it also let me viscerally realise why so many people say that kind of rhetoric. That satisfaction is still the same underpinning emotion, even though most people who will say that phrase are being extremely aggressive about it all, and Shaun really is like, the antithesis of aggressive.
@@copsuicide what's your problem with the mexican educational system?
The new Shaun skull design is the best thing I've seen this entire lockdown
Right? I love it so much
its so pretty, its kinda wholesome i like it a lot
It's not new. I think he used it for a Q&A once.
@@autolycuse2554 well now it's back in a big way
Very cute tbh
"People in government will sell government influence for personal and political gain." Gee, Dennis, you wouldn't have any experience with that, would you?
Prager also made an entire video on why paying politicians for influence is a good thing. Of course, he also made a video about how unions doing that is a bad thing.
I like how they stop the argument as soon it gets to the point where they have to admit the ones corrupting are capitalists seeking profits
@@ddiamond6535 Really? Good lord, the ideological inconsistency is honestly baffling sometimes.
Anything I do = Good
Anything they do = Bad
- Dennis Prager (paraphrased)
@@dragongirl7978 In terms of explicit arguments, yes. The trick, I would suggest, is looking at the ideology of the right as being about power and victory, more than specific principles. A whole lot that didn't make sense before will, if you look at it through that lens. The problem, of course, is that it's difficult to sell people on. TBH, I'm not even sure that most right-wingers are fully aware of the uniting thread behind their claimed positions. The outright fascists are, though.
My girlfriend was killed through vehicular manslaughter and the killer walked away with a broken ankle. I will never forget that a relative told me that they hoped the guy who killed her would get the death penalty. She said it hedgingly, practically stuttering it out. If we are that uncomfortable with the revoking of a human life, why the hell are we advocating for it? When I gave my impact statement in the courtroom, I cried, my friends cried, but even the man who had killed her seemed moved. “I’m so sorry,” he said, “hearing what you’ve said, it feels as though I’ve taken away a little piece of heaven on earth.”
I do not want Cole Mitchel dead. I want him to know what he did and I want him to do better.
Damn, this has me teared up
I’m so sorry for your loss. I wish you, your friends, and your family the best. I hope Mitchel can grow as a human and become a normal member of society.
Bro you sound weak af
People like you give me hope. I hope your heart heals, and that you have a long and beautiful life.
I've wondered about the dramatic trope of sending those guilty of classically capital crimes on dangerous missions, not vainly or vengefully but because that's the only way the missions can be carried out. Would that be a bad idea?
Hbomberguy, Contrapoints, Philosophy Tube: *Uses lighting, costumes, skits, and dialogues to creatively elaborate on the points they make in their videos*
Me: "Perfection."
Shaun: *Puts up a stagnant picture of a skull wearing sunglasses with no variation whatsoever*
Me: "Perfection."
😂 'no variation' you say? but he added and removed a mustache to the skull!
@@mivical ah, my mistake
mivical that wasn't adding a mustache to the skull, that was clearly a different guy, who was a supporter of the death penalty. Shaun is the skull that opposes it, silly billy!
No variation?...you dont remember that action scene where he googled synonyms of the word sequelae? That was crazy.
LOL
Conservatives: Facts don't care about your feelings.
Also conservatives: The death penalty is great because it makes me feel good.
I love strawmen, don't you?
I hate the death penalty. Absolutely despise it. It’s morally wrong and economically insufficient and I agree with anyone who opposes the death penalty. Yet I would consider my self more politically right then left. What bothers me the most are people who will argue against the death penalty passionately yet fight for abortion, euthanasia, and war. It’s terrible that someone would argue for the life of a t for a evil guilty murder rather than a young innocent child. I think that the right and conservatives are usually the ideologically advocates for life with a single acceptation of the death penalty. This comment makes conservative sound like bumbling hypocritical idiots. Most of us aren’t like that. Many of us advocate against the death penalty, and many of conservatives have actual intellectual arguments. Don’t use straw men. It makes you sound uneducated without and a argument and promotes ignorant.
I'm not for the death penalty and I'm a conservative. I'm not really super against it either but if I were a governor and a bill to ban the death penalty in my state was passed I would sign it without hesitation.
@@georgefisher9426 I think the problem hes getting at is that those who want the death penalty trend towards the right, but yes, he could've been more specific that not all conservatives (not Republicans mind you, there is a difference) think that way. As far as abortion goes, that seems like a non sequitur, since comparing an execution being administered by the government to a medical procedure done by a private medical professional to someone who actively chose to have it done is a bit of a stretch. Sure, both result in a corpse, but the context is important.
And as for wanting things to be pro life, Republicans have generally been the ones to trend more likely to throw our military into wars, refuse to give people affordable (and life saving) healthcare, and drag their feet on providing affordable housing and welfare programs to help those have a life. Maybe this is just from my experience and would love to hear examples of how things might be different, but I would especially be interested in why you identify as right leaning?
@ippos_khloros I think his point was that facts not feelings is something that was started by ben Shapiro and other conservative voices (including prager), claiming that left leaning circles only do what makes them feel good. But when asked why Dennis prager supports the death penalty, he resorts to feelings and emotion over fact, thereby contradicting himself.
PragerU brings two major benefits: provides endless material for YTPs and gets Shaun to make new videos
half the time i couldn't be sure if a video title is actually the real deal or a YTP, and the thumbnails are strikingly familiar.
What's a YTP?
@@zompired2998 Putting material from a range of utterly unrelated things into a blender, and turning it into something both entirely different yet inherently related to its sources. th-cam.com/video/k5vsFhcABG4/w-d-xo.html
Results range from atrocious to outright funny, bizarre and/or surreal.
Zompire D videos edited to be funny
@@zompired2998 TH-cam poop! I.e. YTP SpongeBob stuff.
A few big parts of ytp includes visual editing humor, and word mixing.
Heyo Shaun, used to have very conservative thought, when I was 17-18, because I was in a very depressive phase and was barely around people anymore. I later on knew, that these thoughts were irrational, when I started working out and looking up how nutrition works. But even then I still had the emotional part of these conservative thoughts. It’s channels like yours, that help me getting out that last bit, which was keeping me from daring to bond with people.
You will probably never read this, but I want to thank you, for helping people who used to be rational, getting back on the right track again.
CSI type shows have made people grossly overestimate how reliable or scientific so called forensic science actually is today.
That is so on point bro
Yup. Those shows where the cops are all young good looking go getters who will stop at nothing to stop the very very stupid criminals with their endless cash flow to use special tools to help them solve cases easier...
Mean while in reality many American towns have like 2 cops that everyone knows and they can barely hold one criminal for the night lol....
and any "over stepping" or incorrect procedure made by the cops is always portrayed as made in good faith/ needed to proceed with the case.
@@soyborne.bornmadeandundone1342 Granted reality is very different to television in many regards, not least the science aspect, the weight of evidence and police "infallibility"... but in defence of (some) small town officers or sheriff's - they have an advantage in knowing the entire town and can often spot behaviour or circumstances out of character for their small district, where a city police force can struggle. Corruption, prejudice and the itch to close a case at any cost can happen in any place.
He didnt show you that the death penalty in and of itself
He showed you a corrupt justice system who abuses the death penalty
A corrupt justice system will take life death penalty or none
No death penalty does nothing for humanity but a better justice system does ya dingbat
A surgeon who saved my life lost his family to gang violence in a case of mistaken identity. The guy is a saint and visited them in prison and forgave them. Hatred shouldn’t become us.
That is a nice story and all, but it won't appeal to many people. You do not have to forgive, you do not even have to accept, or be happy about, or even not wish these people dead: You can feel and want all those things, and yet still arrive at the conclusion that death penalty doesn't provide almost any of the benefits we think it does. I know for a fact that if someone murdered my family, I'd probably give everything up and kill them in cold blood for revenge, but still oppose the death penalty. Is it hypocritical? Maybe. But maybe it is just my logic and my irrational human emotions just not agreeing, and in any intellectual conversation I cannot condone capital punishment. Emotionally I can, but I will not let my emotions dictate what is reality.
@@7PlayingWithFire7 at least you can admit the core ideal of the death penalty: revenge. I haven’t heard of a decent argument for capital punishment that doesn’t include revenge.
@@nickthompson1812 I very slightly support capital punishment, but certainly not in the manner that it's carried out by countries that currently use it. In my opinion, if someone is convicted and is set to be imprisoned until they die - then they themselves should be allowed to request the death penalty. There would have to be governance in place to ensure that they are not forced to request it under duress however.
This would give wrongfully-convicted people the ability to appeal and rightfully-convicted people the option to avoid many decades in prison without hope of release. This system then avoids the revenge or malice point. Although I can understand people being uncomfortable with giving criminals agency over their sentence.
@@lewis4200 that'd be exploited by the police force via torturing.
@@lewis4200 I see where you're coming from but I think the logic is kind of flawed. People who have been wrongfully imprisoned probably don't have much faith in the justice system and not much hope that they'll be proven innocent so I think a lot of them would request the death penalty as well
I'm a little surprised that you didn't mention the fact that the best estimates for wrongfully convicted inmates on death row hover around 5%--which means that if one supports the death penalty, then mathematically, one is saying that they find it acceptable to murder one innocent person for the sake of righteously executing 19 people who theoretically deserve it. That's a pretty psychotically high price to be willing to pay for all of the supposed benefits of the death penalty, let alone the moral quagmire you've roped yourself into where you're saying that on the one hand, one deserves to die for killing an innocent, but on the other that you're willing to kill innocents as a necessary cost of executing the murderers.
That’s the kicker to me. One innocent person’s death is not worth the risk, and humans are excellent at making mistakes.
Exactly. This. Yes.
To these people a 95% success rate is perfectly acceptable when dealing with human lives.
Roll a D20
@@huntermattson169 Oh shucks! Crit fail!
I've been pro death penalty most of my life, but this video has caused me to think about it in ways I haven't before. then again I was pretty much raised in a PragerU style way.
Ay nice
Congratulations for being a good enough, empathetic enough person to change your mind and even confess it. It's so, so hard to find these days.
i know it’s been two years since this comment and i have no clue how/where you’ve ended up. but i just wanted to congratulate on being willing to change and learn and not blindly accepting what you’ve learned your entire life. i hope all is good, sending good vibes in your direction.
edit: your subscriptions are public so im sending even more good vibes. you have good taste.
Im pro-death penalty and im glad to say this video if anything it just enforces my belief and I hope that my country should bring it back
@@genericname3206 It still exists in America, and that's my issue. All our methods are inhumane, the innocence ratio is too high, and if human life is to be cherished, then the murderer should have the rest of their life devoted to the family of that person.
“Many that live deserve death, and some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.” - Gandalf
Came here to say this. That's my whole argument against this.
Let me introduce to you a concept called justice.
What Gandalf was talking about was killing someone in cold blood. The death penalty comes after a trial and a very thorough investigation.
Congratulations, you misquoted Gandalf.
Ryan Croy
Is it possible to execute an innocent person?
@@ryancroy Gandalf was talking about killing Gollum, when Frodo proposed that it would inflict less suffering on Gollum and everyone else to just kill him and have it done with. If anything, Frodo's proposal was self-defense, as Gollum had tipped off the wraiths to where the Bagginses were.
@@ryancroy it specifically refers to judging whether or not someone should live or die. how the fuck are you trying to act like it's taken out of context and doesn't refer to judgement. also this is In Cold Blood. Hot Blooded murder is murder in the heated moment cold blooded is premeditated, like openly pondering over whether or not someone deserves to die with 12 of your closest friends. The justice system is designed to remove all 'hot blood' from the equation and decide what objectively happened and needs to happen as a result.
Shaun: "And that is ulitmately a worse crime than me, as an individual, not getting what I want"
Conservatives: "There is no worse crime than me, as an individual, not getting what I want"
"Most murderers aren't thinking logically. If they were, they probably wouldn't be murdering someone" This sort of phrasing amuses me and only has that effect thanks to your tone of voice and on-point deliveries. Great stuff.
lol Shaun is too fuckin hilarious whenever he talks about people doing horrible things.
@Mister Guy he talked abt organized crime in the video tho and how that's very different, a lot of murders are cases where emotional tension or mental stress got too high and people snapped. motivations arent 100% logical and while they come from base emotions of fear and survival and trying to cope with situations, a person isn't really thinking about the value of life when they suddenly grab a gun off the table, they're analyzing the situation sure but they're also often greatly exaggerating the situation/being blinded by their emotions and that doesn't lead to a fool-proof analysis and nor does it negate the chance of impulsive decision making
plus that just completely erases murderers with corrupt reasoning skills or corrupt moral compasses, neither of those things are exactly "logical thinking"
@Mister Guy He did say "MOST" murderers.
A lot of murderers are completely logical people. Their logic isn’t exactly sound, but they truly believed they were justified in what they did. The Unabomber is a good example.
@conan263 There's a difference between motivation and execution (no pun intended), though. A murderer may plan out a perfect, utterly genius tactic for taking out a coworker, but that doesn't make the motivation any more logical if it's simply because the coworker was on a date with a girl the murderer fancies.
Im endlessly struck by how odd it is to both implore support for the death penalty because of the suffering these murderers inflicted while also dismissing entirely the suffering inflicted by a wrongful execution of an innocent person.
What about the suffering of the victims? Should that be forgotten?
Wrongful execution is much, much rarer than repeat offences. I'd say it's a fair risk to take
Well look at you willing to throw innocents to death. All under the presumption that death of the criminal would erase suffering from his victims' families. How's that more effective than life in prison? It certainly isnt cheaper for tax payers or humanely pursued. Also at least 4% of convictions being wrongful for death row isnt rare.
@@Unf0rget No, it won't erase victim's sufferings. But it sure as hell is better than letting the offender live in relative luxury.
Name one innocent person in the US who was executed in the last 20 years
That's a rather interesting limitation for a few reasons. Only 11 states have even had an execution in the last 10 years. The rest have suspended or repealed capital punishment.
However there are a few recent cases receiving a lot of scrutiny that havent been fully exonerated post death like Nathaniel Woods and Cameron Todd Willingham.
Another common statistic from the Death Penalty Information Center cites 190 exonerated victims of the death penalty since 1973.
In short the lack of innocents killed seems more a result of the lack of anyone being killed rather than justice being more accurate in recent years.
Hello, Biology student here - DNA testing used for crimes is not foolproof.
You might want to go into detail a little instead of making a flat statement.
Pocari S I’m saying there’s no point in making a flat statement in almost any situation. I know there’s a myriad of ways DNA testing can mess up.
there’s an entire episode on citations needed podcast about that
@@idkusername5789 You don't have to be a biology student to understand why.
Say you collect DNA from the crime scene, for example from the murder weapon. A result pops up, and it turns out that the murder weapon was handled by the guy in the gun store. Is the guy in the gun store then definitely guilty? Or was he just the one who sold the weapon?
This is exaggerated a bit to help further understanding. The point is, many could have handled the weapon, and thus anyone who handled the murder weapon could come up as positive in a DNA test.
@@idkusername5789 i recommend reading the paper "are dna tests infallible?" published by the international society for forensic genetics, which neatly outlines the various possibilities for error in the dna testing process. for a more in-depth read, "the potential for error in forensic dna testing (and how that complicates the use of dna databases for criminal identification)" by william c. thompson for the council for responsible genetics goes into a great deal of the detail you seem to be looking for in a youtube comments section.
"He could just ask Jordan Peterson"
Well, not so easy nowadays apparently
Why so?
mason wade he got addicted to benzos and went into a coma in some Russia hospital no one really knows for sure
Awab Qureshi see my other comment
Seth Williams gamer move
@@sethwilliams8625
It's weird honestly
Why Russia?! He is Canadian and spends lots of time in America, he could go to a rehab in either county.
Many people get addicted every day but his case is the weirdest one
I love watching these 40 minute rebuttal videos to oversimplified 3 minute prager videos lol
That's how good conservatives are with creating bullshit
Death penalty is some old testament eye for an eye nonsense. I guess tho shall not kill can be selectively interpreted.
@Fen Vulpeus no worries, sometimes we let our emotions override our better judgment.
"A lie can be halfway around the globe while the truth is still lacing its boots at home." Great saying from Paul Harrell.
I love how Shaun doesn't have background music. I'm really put off by video essayists with background music!
The fact that PragerU says that when someone gets murdered and the murderer inflicts "unimaginable terror" and the victims' family members have to watch as the person who murdered their loved one, they say the penalty should be death. But when a police officer murders someone, gets paid leave while there's an investigation of a murder on video from 8 different angles, while the police as a whole then crack down and inflict unimaginable terror on the community that's calling for justice... well they should've just complied, it's ok to have killed them because they didn't do everything the police said, despite none of them having been indicted much less convicted for any crime whatsoever. Resisting arrest is a charge, it's a thing you bring against someone in court, it's not an argument for capitol punishment carried out by a government employee with a gun. Gods this kind of thing makes me so angry
Name one cop who got away with murder
@@gopher7691 Philip Brailsford and, as an accessory to the killing, Charles Langley, the men who killed Daniel Shaver.
@@austrianking6052 there was a trial and brailsford was found innocent of second degree murder. Do you know something the jury didn’t know?
@@gopher7691 there are definitely cops out there that got away with it, we just don't know it yet because they're currently getting away with it.
@@DeaconPain there are less then 20 cases per year where police kill a suspect, less than 10 black suspects. At the same time there are thousands of murder victims a year, many who are black. Black people have far more to fear from black criminals than they do from cops. And so what? We shouldn’t execute murderers because rarely a suspect dies in police custody? One has nothing to do with the other
Is PragerU really arguing for doing something based on feelings rather than facts?
oh god yes XD
I can't remember. Was it him who said that about feelings and facts or was it someone else?
@@jacobscrackers98 it was ben shapiro, who's been on prageru
Jacob Stewart ben shapiro, who’s ideals more than align with mr prager
don’t they always? It’s just that this time they don’t put on the thin pretense that it’s about facts rather than feelings
Police "mistakes" are ubiquitous. Years ago in Barcelona there was an incident in which the police tried to stop an illegal party with over a hundred attendants in the center of the city, and people at the party threw objects at them from the building. One of the policemen was gravely injured and ended up in a coma. The police detained and brutally tortured some young people they found at the street nearby, and later a young girl they found at a nearby hospital, just because of their "punk esthetic". None of them were at the party at the moment nor had they been there. They were convicted for attempted murder based solely on two policemen's witness, which were later found to lie on a separate case. The girl committed suicide a few years later.
There is an award-winning documentary on these events. Unfortunately we cannot put a team of journalists and filmmakers to work for months behind every single case.
th-cam.com/video/AyGbIfV0paw/w-d-xo.html
In France, during manifestations, several persons were badly injured or killed by "non-lethal" weapons. Including innocent persons not manifesting (not to say the manifestants were not innocents :p), like an old lady who get her head out of her window to look the manifestation, killed by a rubber ball while she was at the second floor ^^'
Yeah, policemen are always right in their use of violence :D
@@krankarvolund7771 Just like the people are. I do so love revolutions. ;)
Krankar Volund manifestations? What does that refer to in France?
Alabama just executed a man they had known for years was entirely innocent
@@socksleeve it sounds like "people who appeared at the scene but were not involved in the incident"?
quick observation, but the mustached pro-death penalty argument of "its just not being done ENOUGH" around 28 mins in is the exact same logical argument for "crony" capitalism just needing to be more aggressively capitalist to work. like "its not working cause you arent doing it Hard Enough"
Funny enough that's the same argument a lot of tankies use for certain communist governments too.
I admire your linking of the death penalty to capitalism which has its faults but has up to this point in history has been the defacto most successful and in terms of innovations in inventions and technology capitalism has produced pretty much every major human achievement and inventions that greatly improved humans daily lives (automobiles,computers,internet,cell phones,telephones, solar panels, the light bulb and I could go on) all these either in there existence, or being modified to be more consumer friendly and more easily accessed to larger amounts of people due to capitalism and people being able to put there genius into a way that both gave them motivation to pursue these due to financial stability and legacy and also to continue making it the best version of it can be or someone else will end up doing it, it's not perfect and I think no matter what you have to have some social programs put in place for people to at least have a access to food, shelter, health care to a extent that's reasonable but also not the bare minimum, and lastly when u look at any other forms of government it'd either very small countries who can afford and distribute social programs with much more ease then large countries (amd even these have capitalism ideals in that it has a free market and citizens can pursue whatever they want in terms of money earning or making) and suggesting anything close to Marxism, communism or fascism is just not a serious argument as a small look into the human suffering and genocides that these governments have committed are unbelievable in terms of numbers and most have trouble not collapsing in less then 10 years
that's the annoying thing for a lot of stuff, whenever stuff like this fails the reason given is that they simply didn't do it enough, note how they won't do stuff like this for welfare or free healthcare
All pro-death penalty people talk about who's getting the execution, not who's the executioner.
Ira because they either don't want to think about it or they don't want us to know they want to be the executioner.
They also don't like to consider the fact that they themselves deserve punishment by their own standards.
That is the one argument against the death penalty that gives me pause. I certainly wouldn’t want to be an executioner and I’m sure there is a lot of mental anguish for those who are executioners.
I suppose there is some comfort in knowing that lethal injection is painless and the murderer deserves to be executed and therefore justice is being done
A soldier who kills the enemy may feel bad about it but we still need soldiers
@@gopher7691 except lethal injection is often not painless. It’s against our oath for a physician to participate in state sanctioned murder, and the AMA code of ethics states that we cannot even opine on execution methods or which one would be best for a prisoner.
Because actually clinicians are essentially never involved in lethal injections and the medications they get are sometimes substandard or not mixed correctly, the process has a good chance of not being painless.
@@michaelgoldstein8516 be honest. Even if a painless execution could be guaranteed you would still oppose it wouldn’t you?
@@Sienisota I don’t know the best way. If you say so. All I know is the Oklahoma City bomber killed 29 children and he deserved to die. I certainly don’t want to torture him, but he must be executed
The guillotine is gruesome to watch and has unpleasant associations with the French Revolution. But hey if you want to convince your legislators to make it an option good luck to you.
The irreversibility of the death penalty is the reason I'm against it. I can easily name some people throughout history who deserve to die. But I don't believe it's possible to create a justice system that is reliable enough to mete out a penalty that can not be reversed if it turns out to be a mistake.
Well said, comrade
You'd need to literally be capital-G God levels of omniscient and infallible to get justice perfectly right. Seems to me like our justice system shouldn't be taking the hard approach, too much risk.
Name one innocent person who was executed
@@gopher7691 Timothy Evans en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Evans
@@f1neman with dna testing aren’t we more sure of guilt now? Why is dna testing good enough to free the innocent but not good enough to execute the guilty
It's also worth mentioning that one reason why the death penalty is banned in the EU is because the government could use it to suppress political groups.
@Britannic so ehm, how about the crusades? And the whole thing in france between Catholics and protestants? The 80 year war? The Spanish Inquisition? Augustine? The army of god? Emperor Constantine? Adolf Hitler? All the middle eastern people who have been killed by christian soldiers, from the biggest christian nation in the world (us)?
Britannic Eye for eye is not literal. It's referring to requiring those that hurt someone to pay their victim an amount that is equivalent to the damage they received. That has nothing to do with the death penalty, which God specifically demands be given to murderers.
That’s also one of the reasons why Norway abolished the death penalty in 1902.
I'd also like to say that the first and main proponent of abolishing the death penalty in europe (i believe maybe in the whole world) was an italian writer called cesare beccaria, who *in the 1700s* wrote an extensive treatise detailing why both the death penalty and torture were immoral/useless/etc., and his writing caught on making it so his home state, the grandduchy of tuscany (this was before italy was unified as a single state) was among the first, if not *the* first to abolish the death penalty. So yeah, we figured this shit out in the 1700s, it's a bit worrying that other states like the us are still three centuries behind.
@@ErbBetaPatched God also specifically demands that a man lay down with his daughters as he would his wife. Not to mention even though he knew humans would bite the apple and succumb to sin, yet made them anyway so that they can likely go to hell, unless they are his special snowflakes who worship only him, because god is a jealous god. Then he let his only son get murdered horrifically to save people. Sooo... I'm pretty sick of people supporting a sadistic megalomaniac and telling everyone that he loves them. If he exists, he's not a god worth worshipping. He rules through fear and malice.
The Goal of Criminal Justice System is to deal with criminality in a systematic way with a minimum of human suffering. It is not to give you an endorphin hit from having criminals brutalized.
@Terncote Great point Terncote.
Why can't these fools just stick to harmless video game violence to get their rocks off? That's what I do to get that feeling of power... Guess it's not good enough unless it's the real thing. To me that's sick......
Treat others with humanity please! Enter fantasy land if you want to be a cruel king.
That's what it should be. It's definitely to give the sensation of order restored to the public, reinforcing the system itself, without any regard for human suffering.
Sometimes it feels like Dennis specifically selects all of his opinions just to piss me off individually. Like he's some kind of antagonist Christ, that knows me personally and is intent on aggravating within me what I assume is medically referred to as super-alcoholism.
LOL
Once my dad stumbled upon the conservative radio station, and Dennis Prager was this depressed man on the station spewing absolute bullshit then advertising a product, I can’t believe this man exists
@@cursedcat6467 In the two years since I made this comment, my blood pressure rose so high that I had to start blood pressure medication and almost completely quit drinking. Dennis's bullshit caused me to almost die and was also my salvation in some indirect way.
@@somethingelse4424 God gives the nod to the devil sometimes as a warning to mortals.
Shaun’s skull looks so peaceful lying in the flowers. I am envious
I keep expecting the end credits to scroll by.
That’s ... morbid.
My personal reasons for being against the death penalty: First, it's just too rife with errors and mistakes. You can't undo any punishment, really, but being dead makes an apology extra difficult. Second, it's not about big government or small government, I just don't want a function of government to be killing prisoners, period. Huge government for education and healthcare, if that's what it takes, great, but I vote "no" to the Bureau of Killing People In Our Custody.
Conformist138 based
@clam still... In the midst of a pandemic you don't think health care sounds appealing...
Third, if someone becomes a criminal, society failed in some way. One doesn't deal with failures by killing them, it's your job to fix them somehow. At least try.
@@swanpride I don't think that makes much sense. If someone commits a crime as being wronged, like the father of a victim killing the killer. Then yes, society has failed you. But society is not responsible for your emotions and actions or lack of your responsibility. If you get mad at your neighbour, and go and kill him, or break into someone's house to rob and kill them, then that's on you. And you deserve to take responsibility for your action.
Doesn't that first point kinda remove any punishment? Since even having a criminal offense on your record can ruin future job prospects, regardless of if the decision was later overturned.
I watched a documentary comparing the prison system in the US to that in Norway, known as being one of the most humane and successful prison systems in the world. In Norway there's no death penalty, and the maximum sentence even for murder is 21 years. At the end of the documentary, the interviewer asked one of the Norwegian prison officials (I can't remember if it was a guard or somebody higher up in the justice system) what she would say to the family of a murder victim who wanted the perpetrator to suffer. The official said that wanting them to suffer is an emotional reaction, but they are the department of corrections, not of emotional reactions.
I can't find the video but I'll always remember that quote.
I’m glad we at least have a life sentence in most states here. I wouldn’t want a child rapist out on the streets after 20 years.
@PolySaken but there's a chance that they don't change. Are you ok with the fact that another kid could get raped by the same dude
PolySaken Since the American prison system focuses on retribution rather than rehabilitation, it’s less likely that a person will change, unfortunately. But obviously it’s not impossible.
So Brevjik or whatever the fuck his name was kills 70+ people, and gets to spend the rest of his days in a warm, comfortable cell, playing on a Playstation and eating 3 square meals a day? The Norwegians have a funny idea of justice.
@@hellboy6507 From what I understand, they are reviewed at the end of their sentence, and the sentence can be extended by increments of five years at a time if they are still deemed as unsafe.
the 'bringing closure to family' is such a weird argument - like, that's clearly not a universal sentiment (at least, not always the strongest one), so, if the family doesn't want to have anyone killed on their behalf, it's totally pointless, and even harmful... but it's also obviously unjust for a murderer to get a different punishment based on the beliefs of their victim/victim's family, which is probably why that's not (explicitly) how it works in basically any other situation.
Especially if the family doesn't want the killer killed. I've heard about families of murder victims having to defend the murderer just so that their values and morals didn't get flushed down the crapper when the killer went to the chair. If that's not fucked, IDK what is.
@@natesmodelsdoodles5403 Anyone who defends the death penalty based on that is acting selfishly. Nothing more.
Remind them of that, this thirst for blood is not for those wronged. It's for them only.
I hadn't listened to Jordan Peterson's voice in a while and was taken aback just by how much he sounds like Kermit the Frog
Olly thorn's impression of him is the only moment i dont hate listening to it
He certainly never sounds like a real person making a real argument. Even when he argues against the death penalty it sounds like he'd rather not be doing so.
Kermit the fraud
@@georgekostaras
i call him the white christian deepak chopra :D
John Sullivan he just sounds perpetually uncomfortable. It’s like there’s a big spider in front of him and he’s trying to stay still
My opinion actually changed watching this. I used to write essays supporting capital punishment in college, but now that it was brought to my attention that you can separate criminals deserving death from the government being able to inflict it, I feel rather enlightened. Thank you.
Same. That was the key that got me. I still believe some folk deserve death, but frik the government if they think they have the right to carry it out.
@@PopeGoliath That is so correct. I am anti-death penalty and always have been, but at the same time, I very much believe there ARE people who deserve to die. People who murder, rape, torture or sexually abuse children, for example. If someone caught a criminal murdering or raping his wife and killed them in a rage, I'd probably applaud. But it's quite different if you get the state to do it 20 years later in cold blood.
i never supported the death penalty, but i wasnt really against it. now i firmly am. there are reasons to kill people, but they arent reasonable.
"Murder Victims' Families for Human Rights", sounds much worse when read as an imperative...
Lmao.
Punctuation is important.
Thank goodness for apostrophes
Oh dear
@@acehealer4212 Doesn't help. The problem isn't punctuation, it's the ambiguity about whether "murder" is being used as a verb or an adjectives.
PragerU: Does a video about the ten commandments being true
Also PragerU: the death penalty is moral
The commandment says you shall not murder. Kill and murder are two different things, killing can be righteous. But of course a lot of bleeding hearts like you just interchange them in this context
@@kajamatousek247 Yes, god simply RIGHTEOUSLY killed thousands in the bible, setting forth armies to do horrible things to families. Praise be to god.
@@kajamatousek247 nope, I'm very sure it says "thou shalt not kill"
@@kajamatousek247 Why do you like killing defenseless people so much?
@@powltato6192 you’re very wrong then. The “ten commandments” are written in Hebrew originally and that commandment says לֹא תִרְצָח which when translated into our context means you will not kill unlawfully, which is what we call murder. Killing was permitted as the death penalty was literally part of some commandments as the punishment for certain crimes, and therefore was not a violation of לֹא תִרְצָח.
*All* conservative arguments are based on "how do you feel?" but it's rare that they actually show it so openly.
Wanting (free, or any for that matter) housing and healthcare is an emotional argument as well.
Why would that be the case?
Housing and healthcare are a necessity for human survival.
How is wanting the bare minimum to live "an emotional argument"?
@@mayamayhemmusic Not wanting to have hunger and freeze on the streets are all "emotions".
Just adjusting the often falsely applied dichotomy of "emotional argument vs. logical argument", which isn't really an accurate model - emotions/instincts lie at the core of every fundamental value or goal;
smaller instincts/emotions, less accepted/acknowledged by the ego, can be in conflict (or harmony) with the more fundamental ones;
or, they can indirectly lie in conflict with them, by disrupting with the "rational" pathway of achieving those fundamental goals.
These secondary "interfering" impulses can very well end up replacing the previously accepted, fundamental impulses that informed the "core values" - thus becoming the new, alternate core values.
That's a much more accurate model, both applicable to political views as well as personal discipline etc.
Conservatives : "Facts don't care about your feelings"
Also conservatives : "How do you feel about murderers"
@@username45739 It's really not emotional at all, even if many people make emotional cases for such. You can logically conclude most leftist policies have a fundamental putpose of getting the most out of tax dollars, while getting the best results. Both of these policies clearly fall in line with this.
Honestly the most cogent argument I've ever heard Jordan Peterson make.
i actually agree with him about something. I need a shower.
@@wombatkidd feels weird doesn't it.
He’s actually a pretty intelligent guy, especially when it comes to like psychology. He has a lot of far fetched, yet interesting ideas. He’s not just the sort if conservative talking head that should be written off without listening to anything he has to say.
@@neomcdoom Yeah he's smart on the psych stuff, but really stupid when it comes to politics/post modernism
@@neomcdoom yeah but have you seen the insane timecube level mind map from his book? It's in a thoughts lime video
27:46 You didn’t have to attack hbomberguy like that
That's his revenge after hbomb killed him in the no man's sky review.
@@shadysam7161 also for killing his fursona in the climate denial video
Here to give this another listen after last night's state-sanctioned murder of Marcellus Williams.
I think that “let’s execute bankers” argument kinda worked on me no lie
the "let's execute the rich" argument usually tend to overlook the resources(lawyers, money and all that influence) they have, which backfires on the lowly citizen when brought up into court. so i suggest be wary of it if so happen you see it popping up in other discussions.
Problem is that the people who control systems of power are never going to support using those systems in ways that could harm them without a significant upside. The rich and powerful have every reason to diminish the punishment for the financial and political crimes they are often guilty of.
This is why the harshest punishments are not extended to the most harmful crimes. No one gets the death penalty for stealing hundreds of millions from the people, even though it likely caused objectively more harm than a handful of direct murders. The harshest white collar convictions only happen to those who stole from other rich people, as a way to preserve the shared class interest.
The death penalty is the most primitive expression of state power possible. As a result it is also completely shaped by the nature of said power.
@Glühfunke The Red side comrade, the red side :p
I'd rather just sentence them to have to survive solely on public assistance for 5-10 years and freeze all their other assets.
@Glühfunke how can you be a communist and horseshoe theory yourself and then spend the entire comment repeating right wing propaganda?
I have never agreed with anything I've heard Jordan Peterson say before. Ever.
Congratulations, Shaun; you've changed that.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. That said I feel like I need to go take a shower for thinking that Jordan Petersen made a good point.
@@centurion1945 I don't understand why he is so hated.
@@ayeyobossman6151 www.reddit.com/r/enoughpetersonspam/comments/c2ny3g/why_do_you_hate_jordan_peterson_the_megathread/
@@chapogang1312 "circle jerk", as they call it on reddit. Cool
@@ayeyobossman6151 some people can't stand what he's saying. But, watch any video, he's being violently shut down, not disagreed with. If there is a single argument against his points, no one was capable enough to bring it forward.
Shaun: If you believe that people who commit terrible crimes, such as dennis prager...
Me: Yes.
I agree, Dennis Prager *IS* a terrible crime.
"Should be hung by his ankles while we all throw axes at him"
WTF, I love the death penalty now.
@@a.p.2356
Lmao, you people dislike the death penalty until it fits you? You'd kill PragerU over a rapist? Interesting.
@@laurence6325
Huh?
My country's method of execution is hanging and the last time anyone was hanged was on March 2020 and it was a group of 4 people convicted of raping, torturing and murdering a 24 yr old. I felt grim satisfaction as I read about how they were vilified, tortured in prison (by guards and other prisoners) and then were finally hanged. But then I recalled a report from few years before where there was another gang rape case and the accused were taken to the crime scene "for cross checking testimonies" and they were shot for "injuring an officer and trying to escape". This were clearly extrajudicial killings and I remember being disgusted with how these police officers were lauded by the public and their chief as heroes. And anyone who pointed this out were treated like rape apologists. It was so easy to just kill the wrong person like what they did here.
And now thanks to you Shaun, I can see how this easily applies to death penalty as well. If these officers can just shirk the consequences of an open murder, then just expediting the process of death penalty just causes the same thing except that we will never know.
Make no mistake. I feel like all rapists should suffer everything horrible under the sun. But death penalty is something that I need to rethink my support of.
The Nirbhaya case from India. Reading about it is what got me here
This year is so weird. Shaun showed me a clip of Jordan Peterson and Dave Rubin and I agreed with what they said.
I try not to have an overall opinion of someone. It's likely you agree and have much more in common with people than you can know.
@@blumousey Fair point but not all of the time... Sometimes you just have nazi boot lickers and it's that simple...
Blah blah blah a broken clock is roght twice a day blah blah blah etc etc
@@soyborne.bornmadeandundone1342 Yeah, but as bad a Jordan peterson often is and as dumb as his rhetoric can be (and aggressive as he sometimes is from his detractors), he isn't the worst.
It’s not so weird; the way they arrive at it is pretty bad. Peterson and Rubin argue that the government shouldn’t have the power to execute people because it’s expensive and it gives too much power to the government. Not because the death penalty is vengeance rather than justice, not because an innocent could be killed, not because the justice system could be corrupt. The argument comes at it from a conservative ‘anti big government’ approach to whether the death penalty should be *applied* and not whether the act itself is morally wrong.
Let’s say the slow appeal and review process didn’t exist and the cost of the death penalty were to lower. Let’s also say that private prisons could perform executions at their discretion on the advice of a court. These guys would probably agree with allowing the death penalty in that case.
You claim to be pro life, yet this is at least the fourth time you've killed PragerU smh
me *weeping hysterically*: "STAPH.... STAAAPPP. HE'S ALREADY DEAD"
*the shaun the sentient skeleton is clawed off prager's unconscious body by the krusty burger crew*
@@OhNotThat The sentient skeleton is then put through a lengthy review process after his guilty conviction in which he was assigned the death penalty, he would finally be put to death 23 years later after several reviews.
@@brewcolthup7821 jokes on the state, the skeleton is already dead so the death penalty means nothing. Undead ftw
@@OhNotThat *skeleton taps head* I paid the death penalty years ago.
PragerU: because dead ideas may never die
Hearing Shaun say "Today we're going to talk about the death penalty." in his usual calm monotone voice is a treat.
Honestly, I've watched his stuff so often that just hearing him say "hello everyone" in that exact same tone of voice gives me joy. Like "YES HELLO SHAUN!!!! WE'VE MISSED YOU!" It always signals something awesome is gonna happen.
Do you trust the police?
Crowd: "No"
Do you trust the justice system?
Crowd, more cheerfully: "No!"
Do you want death penalty?
Crowd, breaks in violence: "Yes!"
Top 10 Arguments agains the death penalty
1) You could kill an innocent person
Thanks for your time.
2-) It's inmoral
3-) It cost a lot of money to the state, even more than prison.
Conservatives arguments:
1-) rEvEnGE!1!1!1!1!
privado privado I love when they argue that it costs more to keep them alive (because they all think when you’re sentenced to death they just execute you right away). Because 1. Like you said, it does cost much much more to execute and 2. Even if it did cost more to keep them alive, the fact that some people would be willing to kill potentially innocent people just to save money is disgusting
That’s also an argument for the death penalty 😈
Ernesto Acosta this is no place to be edgy
This video's whole alternative is "oH oK sO iNsTeAd Of KiLlInG tHeM wE wIlL iMpRiSoN ThEm FoR lIfE"
Shaun during a pandemic you shouldn’t be going on a nice sunny holiday
Smh
He's already a skeleton anyway. What's the worst that could happen?
@@64B_ is he a skeleton?
I thought he was just a skull
Myles is White more like sms
(Shake my skull)
@@fallenmango8420 The correct term is "demilich".
"It's just a skull" = "famous last words" for D&D players 😄
Going outside alone doesn`t hurt anyone.
One of the funniest things to me about the whole argument around the "closure" the death penalty provides is it just makes me wonder if they've ever read a book, watched a movie, a TV show, anything? Revenge and the ultimate failure of vengeance in accomplishing any kind of closure has been a prevailing theme of literary tradition for a very very long time. The loss of a loved one is a very large circular hole and vengeance is a very small square peg that neither naturally fits nor closes the hole in any meaningful way. Vengeance might be inspired by loss, but it by no means sufficiently makes up for it or really makes it any better. Humans have been exploring this for probably thousands of years, yet its still one of the foundational arguments people make for the death penalty.
Right? When the Joker was killed, Batman thought he finally had closure since in this version, he killed his parents. We later find out in the sequels that he still never got over his loss.
Not really. The message is not about revenge being unfulfilling, it’s about it not being worth what the hero sacrificed for it, i.e. personal relationships, a normal life, not having an unhealthy obsession, etc. Even then thinking about these books in social terms helps you understand the context. The morals being pushed in such stories are for the benefit of the society, not the individual.
Everyone is different. Some people feel it’s closure
Yeah, except rapists don't get to live, and shouldn't. Much less murderers.
As someone who lost a non immediate family member to a fairly awful murder, I say let the fucker live, but make his life a hell. Why should he get to just die when he quite literally tortured said person to death? I like the being forced to support the victims idea, but I also do like prisons being used as a poetic justice place- that other inmates treat you depending to severity of your crime, so if you did something truly unforgivable, they will make you wish you were dead. Maybe this is pretty vengeful, but I think in more extreme cases like that, it is fair enough, though that also does require the people investigating their crime to do their job properly/not to abuse their power.
I love Shaun's videos. I frequently re-watch older videos of his just because they're so well-argued and well-thought-out and compassionate. Nobody in the whole video essay game is doing it like him.
The thing with the death penalty is that you can never truly be 100% sure of a person's guilt. There have been so many cases of people being found innocent after they were already put to death.
And what’s the ratio between those who were rightfully put to death for being guilty and those who were not?
@@AjoraYT no idea, but one unjust killing is too much when alternative punishments that are reversable exist
@@AjoraYT If the killing of innocent people is a crime, then the number ratio has to be 100% or capitol punishment can't be considered just
I am questioning though, what if the killer has images and footage of their victims, and it shows the accused of committing the crime?
It's all very tricky..
@@maschaorsomething A study a few years ago suggested that up to 4% of people put on death row are innocent.
I was slightly on the pro-death side of the argument before this video. Never has a TH-cam video so quickly changed my mind about something. Good work Shaun.
You're lucky. Hell... We're lucky... This dumb ass site default tries to push you into a alt right direction before it points you in a left wing direction...
Makes sense though... TH-cam is pretty corporate and that's how that goes...
@@soyborne.bornmadeandundone1342 to be fair, it's kind of even sadder than that? TH-cam itself is very corporate but most of the engineers working on it probably aren't. They really just wanted to have a system that helps people find what's relevant to their interests. Unfortunately big data ends up encoding and reflecting society as it is, and that includes a lot of horrible beliefs and behaviours. Any system that's even as basic as like/dislike ends up encoding racism, sexism, anti-leftism, etc. So if anything it's too much faith in humanity using their product, which... yeah feels even sadder than something deliberately constructed to boost right wing views.
Right at the start TH-cam recommendations were basically just a most watched high score board. Obviously view count wasn't a good metric, those lists ended up pretty static most of the time. Then they started being simplistically based around keywords, which people ended up learning how to game quite quickly as a form of SEO.
Then they were like, okay what if it's based on videos that get the most comments and people hitting like and stuff? And mix in some topic matching based on people's history? And interest matching works great for... video games, old cars, stuff that can be pretty neutral like that (though by all means aren't guaranteed to be - look at the whole PewDiePie mess and all of the people who got sucked into the "alt-right pipeline" through him, as ~the algorithm~ adapts and PewDiePie himself becomes a "topic", as enough of people's watch habits cluster around him...). For politics, activism, history, etc... it's a fuckin mess. These programs can't distinguish between tone or opinions, just.... topics.
Vaguely defined, poorly categorised, ever-morphing "topics". And when the right is happy to churn out misinformation at a breakneck pace and the left values fact-checking and being thorough and logically consistent... the right wing stuff easily outweighs the left wing stuff. Misinformation and conspiracies can always outnumber refutations and debunkings, they're just easier to cook up.
So it's inevitable for someone to get recommended a right wing take EVENTUALLY on one of these various topics, which even watching video games can suck you into being classified as interested in due to various personalities, sooner or later, as the higher quality and left wing content all gets used up and watched already. And that's assuming the person even started out from a left wing position themself! If they were already partway to the right, that in itself is also encoded in their watch history and their likes and dislikes, with a big enough dataset. And it's even easier for them to fall into that hole.
It fuckin sucks that designing a program to try and adapt and gauge people's interests ends up reinforcing all preexisting societal bigotries... but it's inevitable so long as society is ugly. We know now that such algorithmic systems are a bad idea. But I don't think there could've been any way to know that from the outset. After all, the idea that you could successfully encode complex relationships and ideas with simply a critical mass of data, with no real structure to it... that was science fiction, pure theory, for a long time. We still scoff at ideas like "the computer gained so much knowledge that it became conscious"... but now we know that "it gained so much knowledge it became racist" is... actually realistic. And sadly inevitable. It's not conscious, still, it has no idea of the ways these relationships of concepts are affecting the world... but the computer program is able to highly successfully replicate those patterns.
Now, can we say TH-cam the company is complicit now that we have observed all the terrible effects? Yes absolutely. It's continuing to use this system and merely trying to tweak it to make it less politically troublesome. But again since it only knows about topics... now any video talking about various topics gets demonetised and subsequently devalued in the algorithm... which hurts the people speaking out against the issues far more than it hurts the people making the issues in the first place. Very hamfisted bullshit. And do I think the engineers shouldn't just go along with management telling them to just tweak things? I do. But I do also recognise that a lot have families and quitting or being fired for noncompliance is a really easy way to get evicted and harm your kids in Silicon Valley. So I think they should try to work at a different company instead of just quitting, practically speaking. And hell some other companies would be even worse to work at like Facebook.
Topic matching is just sooo naive and limited. On Spotify or SoundCloud, if you only listen to music, it works well at telling what musical styles you like. But if you like hip-hop, it can't differentiate between the progressive artists and the regressive ones... any stuff with lyrics in it might suddenly be odious. And if you use those services to listen to podcasts? Then that's almost as bad as TH-cam. I checked out a few very specific episodes of specific series by Vox and The Guardian and started getting recommended stuff by The Telegraph... (which is a right wing newspaper in the UK, supports all the cruelty disabled people are put through by the benefits system, all the cruelty immigrants and asylum seekers are put through, etc etc). And I'm like ugh!! One of the podcasts was called "fix recessions by giving people money" meaning everybody, like a UBI kind of thing, and some recommendations were other podcasts advocating the opposite basically... to fix recessions by revoking the welfare state... because they both have the same kind of topic, use a lot of the same words... they're presumably marked news or politics or whatever in the podcast genre thing.... it's so ridiculous that companies are still pushing this kind of stuff and investors are still eagerly paying huge sums to continue to make systems like this. And let's not even touch the systems that claim to predict someone's propensity to crime by the same methods!!!!
me too!
Nice to hear that.
"This is a REAL video of Obama"
Now you're making me very paranoid of deep fakes
Yes, me too
Or is it?
*X-Files theme plays*
You should be.
There is actually a computer-generated video that looks almost identical. The movement is less fluid. Of course to put it in perspective, the people that developed it spent as much time on this one 30 second clip as the typical movie required. Not an easy thing to do, but not long ago it would have been impossible.
1.There is no credible proof that the death penalty works as a deterrent. In the US, in states where the death penalty has been abolished, there has been no significant change in the rates for serious criminal offenses, such as murder.
2. It is a cruel and unusual punishment, where basic standards of human dignity are compromised or undermined.
It continues the cycle of violence. Retribution is just another word for revenge-it is essentially just a form of the flawed thinking that two wrongs can make a right. The pro argument is that killing people is wrong; therefore, you should kill people for killing, which makes no sense. . .
3. It affects the poorer segments of society and racial minorities disproportionately, in part because they cannot afford the costs of good legal support. In the USA, although only 13% of the population is African-American, 50% of death row prisoners are African-American.
4. The justice system is bound to make mistakes. In the case of people who are wrongly imprisoned, they can be released from prison and given compensation, but a wrongful execution can never be righted.
5. The death penalty is not cost-effective. When all the practical and legal costs are taken into account, it is clear that the execution is more expensive than imprisoning for life.
6. A life spent in prison is a worse punishment than an execution. A life sentence prisoner has many years to endure their punishment, as well as experience remorse and reflect on his or her crimes. of law enforcement officials.
The abolition of the death penalty occurs most often in states where the murder of police officers is a very low percentage of all homicides.
In 2014, there were 14,000 murders that took place in the United States, but there were only 35 executions that took place.
7. It is used to control political messages.
The United States uses the death penalty exclusively for the punishment of crimes as defined by legal code and precedent. It is a principle which is not consistent for other countries in the world. 78% of global executions because of capital punishment come from just four countries when excluding China: Iraq, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. 8. Family members of a victim are adversely impacted by the death penalty.
The Marquette Law Review found that when family members go through the capital punishment process after someone they love becomes a victim, they have higher levels of mental, physical, and behavioral health problems when compared to when the perpetrator receives a sentence of life in prison. Although this issue does not happen in every circumstance, some family members can feel responsible for the fact that the government is putting this criminal to death.
Proponents would argue that capital punishment provides relief because it guarantees that person can no longer harm another, but there are many families who do not feel a sense of satisfaction with this action. If they are the ones who experience loss, then there should be a way to provide input for them. There are very few prison escapes that occur, and fewer that involve violent criminals.
9. The number of escapes from prison in the United States declined by more than 50% between 1998-2013, falling to a rate of 10.5 escapes per 10,000 prisoners in 2013. At the same time, the number of life sentences handed out by the court system has gone up by 500%. Most of the incidents that contribute to a prisoner escape come from low-security situations, like when 16 prisoners walked away from a work site and another 3 disappeared from a community work center.
Out of all of the reported escapes in 2013, only one inmate from a secured facility was able to get away.
Some countries, including Sudan and Iran, use the death penalty as a political tool. It becomes a way to punish political opponents who might want to take their country in a different direction. There were a total of 2,500 death sentences recorded in 54 countries in 2018, with about 20,000 people currently under sentence around the world at the end of the year.
10. Children are sometimes put to death through the use of capital punishment.
There are at least 97 kids who were put to death by capital punishment laws in Iran since 1990. Another 145 child executions have happened in China, the Republic of Congo, Pakistan, Sudan, South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria - and the United States.
Scott Hain, Toronto Patterson, T.J. Jones, Napoleon Beazley, Gerald Mitchell, Shaka Sankofa, Glen McGinnis, and Steven Roach were all put to death in the United States for a crime that they committed at age 17. Sean Sellers was executed when he was 29 for a crime that he committed when he was 16. 11. The evidence obtained to justify the death penalty is sometimes tainted.
There are specific guidelines in the United States today that limit how and when law enforcement can obtain evidence during questioning. This structure of protection is not always available around the world. There are numerous people executed after being convicted during an unfair trial, often on the basis of evidence or confessions obtained through the use of torture. Some defendants were not given adequate legal representation.
Some countries even use the death penalty as a mandatory punishment for specific offenses, which means the judge cannot consider the circumstances of the crime during the sentencing phase of a trial. 12. More focus on Rehabilitation for serious offenders murderers, rapists, pedophiles, abusers, and drug dealers Is more effective to reintegrate them back into society and also get them a job however not everyone can be rehabilitated and that's what maximum-security prison is for the keep them away from the Society but still treat them like human beings NOT like animals take away their freedom not their Humanity. Norway prove this its recidivism rate is 20% in Germany it's 40% in Japan 48% the United States full on punishment prison (with zero Rehabilitation) recidivism rate is 76.6%
Thx for the interesting essay
Yeah
"More focus on Rehabilitation for serious offenders murderers, rapists, pedophiles, abusers, and drug dealers Is more effective"
I don't think that dealing drugs is a serious crime. It's true that drug cartels commit horrible crimes and most of the money made from selling drugs never ends up in a good place but drug dealers are just the expendable tunnel rats and often times addicted themselves or just need money. I would even argue that drug dealers are doing their business more responsibly than most international corporations.
@@4cps777 Agreed. The problem with Cartels isn't the drugs - its the violence, extortion and abductions that go along with maintaining their business. If dealing drugs was a legal profession those crimes wouldn't happen in the vast majority of cases.
Can you name one innocent person who was executed in the last 20 years in the US? The only names you gave were of people who were actually guilty of murder. I thought you were worried about an innocent man being executed
I discovered this channel after watching hbomberguy on the recommendation of my 20 year old grandson! He was pleased that I have enjoyed Harris’s channel and yours. Keep taking on the frightening false narrative of the far right!!
This warmed my heart. Wish I had a grandparent like you :' )
thanks for expressing your views, shella
As someone who is pro-death-penalty, this gave me a lot of perspective. Thank you, Shaun!
The bit with lobster boy and his good friend rave doobin did actually make some sense. It is pricey to put some one down through the legal system. But that's just about the only thing he said there that was spot on lol... Shame he didn't do the right thing and talk about how we need to reform criminals and the mentally disadvantaged instead of killing them/locking them up forever... But Lobster boy isn't there to help people, but rather make himself rich, so of course he didn't go there lol...
My moral stance on the death penalty is pretty simple: Yes, some people deserve to die for their heinous acts, but that doesn't mean any person should be given the right to murder them*. Because that's what execution is, really, just state-approved murder. And I find disturbing that a country of people so obsessed with civil liberties (to the point of endangering everyone around them just because they feel they should have the right to do so) still approves of the ultimate form of government control, the ability to take life in cold blood.
*obviously self defense or the immediate defense of others are a totally different set of circumstances
"Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement."
mightyNosewings who else could say it better than Mithrandir himself
It isn't just a question of the state having the right to kill. It's the state ordering somebody to kill.
@Joe Average Hope you dont go bombing Wall Street. Didn't work so well for y'all back in 1920, did it?
Because revenge, man. And that self-righteous feeling of punishing evil that justifies atrocity.
This video actually managed to change my opinion on the death penalty. Shaun makes a lot of really good points that I had not considered before