gamerdude69 t1_jcr5wju wrote

You think every superstition is true because someone thinks it is? You think there's something to astrology? palm reading? Sacrificing a rabbit to make someone heal faster? Why are you assuming that these people are correct in their superstitions?


gamerdude69 t1_j8pkcq2 wrote

No, I think you're missing my point. I'm saying if the consequences for a mistake are so severe, people won't even attempt that thing anymore. You're putting prosecuting lawyers (and everyone else you mentioned) in a situation that is too precarious: they risk going to prison for 28 years for messing up their job, but if they get too timid, they let a potentially dangerous criminal to go free and then blood is on their hands.


gamerdude69 t1_j8pi2e5 wrote

Implication 2: nobody would work in criminal justice ever again.

Implication 3: we would pay 10s of millions in taxpayer money putting all these people away for that kind of time, on top of still needing to pay the victim. Instead of putting it to use helping more people in greater ways

Not to mention, a judge doesn't decide guilt. Or a lawyer. Jurors do, and they'd vote innocent every time to avoid the risk. People would murder with impunity.


gamerdude69 t1_j81wgik wrote

Imo because it makes the average person more likely to actually finish the book. I think if you are determined to finish the book regardless, reading is better. Especially in this case, because it's a book you'll want to reference for a while as you learn to implement this knowledge.