lsparrish comments on Should criminals be denied cryonics? - Less Wrong

2 Post author: venetian 23 December 2010 04:23AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (49)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: lsparrish 23 December 2010 04:17:46PM 0 points [-]

The judicial system is extremely unreliable-- this in itself suggests that denying cryonics as though you're sure that all the prisoners with life or death sentences are guilty isn't sound.

This is a good point. Perhaps the courts could specify a minimum timeframe to keep the person cryopreserved, which is longer if the evidence is weak. At the end if the criminal is still considered guilty they are thawed and buried. If they are exonerated, their preservation becomes indefinite until a resuscitation method is developed.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 23 December 2010 04:35:54PM 4 points [-]

You are sentenced to read The Agitator until you understand how biased the system is in favor of arbitrary convictions. There are coerced confessions (otherwise known as plea bargains), corrupt judges and prosecutors, and inept forensics labs.

The evidence doesn't have to look weak to be bad, and some of what makes for bad evidence (a line-up can imply that the guilty person is included) can be pretty subtle.