I was reading something somewhere somewhat recently about how the death penalty was not cost effective due to the expensive and lengthy appeals process (the author was from the USA). What struck me about the argument was that by factoring in the appeals process, they had accepted that the process should be there. I would ask: why? Why should there be a way for the convicted to escape their punishment? And before anyone thinks I'm trolling for some moral debate about whether governments have the right... oh you think there is a "right"? I don't think anyone would have the right or get the right or get it right at all. None is more right or correct or valid than any other. I don't deal in such absolutes because they don't really exist. Just a food for thought experiment.
Plus I'm using this post to introduce a new category for my posts. In future there will likely be more, especially if I take to posting about every stupid thing that occurs to me as I try vainly to avoid thought because thought just leads to thinking and I do too much thinking particularly upon subjects I'd rather not think about and most people seem not to think at all anyway...
So, new category, others potentially joining it in the future include (but not limited to): Literature (as in books), Film (as in movies) and actually I think it's just the two at the moment. I find there's no point in talking politics, especially since my location may not match up with the entirety of my audience (if I even have one). I'll try to curb my parenthetical remarks.
No comments:
Post a Comment