= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Kenb comments on Should criminals be denied cryonics? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (49)
Perhaps cryonics suspension should be a new form of punishment. It sure would save taxpaying public millions of Dollars. Imagine a jury considering a verdict between two alternatives: a death penalty, or a life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Sentencing to cryo instead would be equally severe and it would save taxpayers a lot of tax money. In a single case of a life sentence it would be a saving of several million Dollars. The problem would be that bleeding heart liberals would consider it a cruel punishment and conservatives would consider it a slap on the wrist :-)
It seems like cryonics would count as pr(it works) * life imprisonment and pr(it doesn't) * death penalty. That is, it's ambiguous, and cheaper. I expect that the 'cheaper' part will convince taxpayers to support it, convince prison lobbies to fight it, and the ambiguity will let all the politicians support it.