well the cost should be outside of the trials cost

ya, there's not enough information, so i will just have to go with hesitant again.

but if you raise the level of punishment, proper procedures are a necessary cost increase

>disagree with the premise
>but I can think of one instance I made up right now where it could be true

because without having a goal in mind i can't determine the efficiency.

death penalty cost the same as jailing, up till you kill the person then there is a bit more of a cost. then you hand the body over and have no cost after that

repeated appeals to make sure you dont kill the wrong person = more money spent, killing someone = less cash flow in the economy
further, the comparison was to a 100 dollar fine, not jail time

In the US the process of the death penalty costs more than jailing for life

well old days they either marked to let people know he was a thief the person and banished them, or just hung them since they couldn't afford to incarcerate

you can't be arrested, or at least convicted, for involuntary manslaughter right?

They sure did

It does cost alot but idk about jailing for life, but you do have to count the cost in of jailing them for like 10 years or so before you kill them

they also had far fewer methods for figuring out guilt, so who knows how many times they got the wrong answer?

people convict for involuntary manslaughter

uh, ya, not gonna complete this test. Taking like 20 minutes for me to consider each question and ultimately give up and just mark neutral.

Indeed.

thats because you're inventing reasons to not give an answer at this point

Not at all, the statements are just unclear

He's just not being reckless

"do you agree with X"
"Not entirely, but I'll pick neutral anyway"

kek

they are missing information

What's X?

the statement

I can't disagree with something I don't know what it is.

can't agree with it either.

I cant possibly believe you are not doing this on purpose

Well my perspective changes based on the goal. The goals aren't mentioned.

yeah I'm not bothering with this anymore lol. GLHF

apparently there is yet another movie featuring the joker?

ok?

They're going to run the Joker's reputation into the ground by constantly switching actors and putting him in every mediocre movie

can we just throw anyone who utters the words "origin story" in a pitch into a dumpster? I feel like that solves roughly half the problem

Ya, i prefer luke skywalker as the joker.

thats a conservative estimate, fwiw

idk, the lack of origina stories was a problem for DC movies...

I think it was the lack of good movies

You dont really need an origin story for batman or superman. Everyone knows that story

DC just makes bad films yeah

I really like origin stories, but DC just hasn't done good ones.

ya, but the stories change with the times.