How is any punishment for crime defensible, if we sometimes make mistakes?
I'll answer the question myself: all measurement tools are faulty. We strive to be as accurate and precise as possible.
We strive for high sensitivity and high specificity.
Sensitivity = discovering as many guilty as possible.
Specificity = Not punishing the innocent.
The way tests usually work is that if you increase the sensitivity, you end up decreasing the specificity and vice versa.
If the math were this: 500 killers not punished in order to prevent 1 innocent man from being punished, would you accept that? If not, what's the acceptable number to you?
I hate mushy-minded liberals who don't think.
The man who killed the lady in my ward in front of their children. he got some 40 years in jail. To the great thrill of liberals everywhere.
Dead killers don't kill again. We have killers who are killing other prisoners. We have killers who orchestrate killings outside of prison. Don't let the mushy-minded liberals tell you that there is not UTILITY in EXECUTION.
|