MERGED: New day, another shooting in Crown Heights

daver

Carnivore wrote: Not to mention that if the wrong person is convicted and subsequently evidence comes to light proves their innocence (as happens appallingly often), they can be freed.

No kidding.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/know/Browse-Profiles.php

leet

sandcastler wrote:

First let me say I do feel bad for the family and loved ones of Officer Timoshenko. I'm sure we all do. The pain of losing someone dear is always hard to bear, and worse when he or she is killed senselessly in the prime of life.

To respond to your questions, the police and the criminals are at odds with each other, and do shoot at each other. But no, I wouldn't say they were at war. The word war is far too strong me. Why? Does that render the whole comparison invalid or something?

The question i was trying to ask was about noncombatants and civilians and the value of their lives.

If killing a police officer is a capital crime, because that punishment is considered more of a disincentive, why isn't the killing of a civilian also a capital crime?

Is expectation of being killed your standard? Who expects to be killed? A child in a classroom does not expect to be killed. If one did expect it, would that in any way make their killing less heinous?

I dashed off a response to the question and framed my answer in terms of higher penalties for killing a cop as being a disincentive to criminals. We can spin the question in whatever way suits our agenda, no? What is your agenda, I wonder?

The risk of a policeman being killed while on the job is much higher than it is for a financial analyst, or a SAHM, or a child in school.

Or perhaps the higher penalties for killing a police officer, or a transit worker for that matter, is not about their value as individuals at all, but instead reflects the fact that interfering with their work, which is a civil service, can damage the basic functioning of the city.

Here's another way to frame it...it has been very difficult for the NYPD to find enough new recruits. It's a hard, stressful, dangerous job and one that doesn't pay anywhere near as well as, say, financial analyst. Having a special penalty for killing a cop could be viewed as a benefit, like health insurance. This benefit is specific to the job, because the job carries a higher risk of being shot, injured or killed. Maybe it helps to encourage more people to consider becoming police officers.

And as someone else pointed out, killing *anyone* can result in capital punishment for the murderer.

OK, I've procrastinated enough, now I need to get back to work. Bye!

anonymous

leet wrote: The risk of a policeman being killed while on the job is much higher than it is for a financial analyst, or a SAHM, or a child in school.

But much lower than a cab driver or bodega worker.

pitu

Carnivore (logged out) wrote: [quote=leet]The risk of a policeman being killed while on the job is much higher than it is for a financial analyst, or a SAHM, or a child in school.

But much lower than a cab driver or bodega worker.

Or a sanitation worker. Don't garbage men and women have the riskiest job in civil service?

doctorj

I don't know about risks for different professions, but I do know about sports: forget BASE jumping and cave diving, the big killer is lawn bowls.

king without a crown

Lets hire all the Bodega owners and Cab drivers to Police the city.

doctorj

King without a crown wrote: Lets hire all the Bodega owners and Cab drivers to Police the city.

No can do, we need separation of powers. What you're suggesting would be a conflict of interest because the former often sell doughnuts and the latter often obey road rules.