The carbon footprint of violent prisoners

To save the planet, should we execute all prisoners of violent crime?  Let's look at this rationally.

1) Climate change (global warming) is happening.
2) There is strong evidence the primary causes are anthropomorphic.  Specifically, human activities which add carbon dioxide into the atmosphere are warming the planet.
3) Many scientists tell us that unless we take major steps to significantly reduce mankind's carbon footprint, there is a very real chance that millions of people will die as changing climate patterns plays havoc with the food supply, intensify severe weather patterns, and stress aquifers and reservoirs, etc...
4) Violent prisoners, being imprisoned for long periods of time, contribute nothing to society and use up resources, contributing carbon into the air.  To state it bluntly, they do nothing but contribute to global warming because it is almost impossible to reduce a prisoner's carbon footprint. 
5) Executing prisoners would unquestionably reduce carbon output.  Think of all the activities involved in housing them in prison:  gas is wasted as food, medicine, supplies, etc must be delivered to them on a daily basis, guards and other personnel must drive millions of miles each year to show up to work, power plants burn coal so they can wake up under the glare of lights, all for what?  So the earth can continue to warm, killing millions of people and eradicating untold species of animals?
6) If people are really in danger, this is rational.

They should be used as slave labourers.

>>1
More rational would be to just kill yourself. A free man uses a lot more energy than one confined to a cell.

>>1
I do hope you're planning on reviving them when their term is up.

>1) Climate change (global warming) is happening.

There's your first mistake.

>>5

Southern Baptist detected

>>5
enemy of science detected

>>3
But when a free man goes to buy groceries he uses his own money.

>>8
And when a man is imprisoned he sacrifices his freedom. That in itself is the punishment. Killing them in addition to this would be no better than killing a free man.

>>1
So because every single argument in favor of capital punishment is an utter failure, you're just going to go with the "I'm insane, and here's my crazy-talk" approach?

It's shameless... I like it.

Sir,
Interesting. What you are advocating is hard utilitarianism, so if you're going to take it to its conclusion, you'd be better off just spreading a deadly virus through the population. That way the survivors would be A) hardier and B) free to start the whole population boom over again without having to worry about these nasty carbon emissions. After all, just killing a couple of prisoners would hardly have an impact.

Cheers!

>>11

interesting analogy but's it's not applicable.  violent prisoners have already shown through their actions that they have less interest in living in a peaceful world than the rest of us.  if we need to cull the population, where better to start it would also serve as a stark reminder for the rest of us in our quest to reduce emissions.

people who have not committed violent crimes should not be lumped in with criminals.  a virtuous person is better than a criminal.  your "suggestion" conveniently skips over this critical distinction

>>12
First, give me a warrant for your claim that a non-criminal is better. Just because they have not been prosecuted under the laws of a particular country does not mean they are pure of heart or action. In fact, you'll have to prove what makes a person "better" or "worse" than another, which you have not defined.

Even if you can prove that, then you run into a problem. Under a retributive justice system (which cares about a person's guilt and not the effect of their punishment on society), you cannot kill a person to help others. Under a utilitarian system (which values society above a person's guilt of lack thereof) you cannot hesitate to kill a person if it will benefit more people. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

And even if you can somehow manage to skirt that argument, you have to face the fact that all "virtuous" people will suffer if the majority of their fellows continue to live. Just killing criminals might be fine if it would have a serious impact on the climate. But you can hardly contend that the lives of a few million, or even billion, people are worth the fate of humanity as a whole, no matter their virtue. The prisoners can just go first, if you wish. Or they can be tortured or something so that they're not lumped with the law abiding citizens.

>>11
hardier
Resistance to a particular virus does not imply overall hardiness.

My tax dollars can be better used to kill civilians in Iraq.  Fuck violent criminals.

>>1...already U fail. Here's y;

First off, you don't see what good has come out of this global warming thing. We've found one way to change our climate and atmosphere of our planet.

So, if that's true, than the statement about killing off people that committed crimes would decrease the effectiveness of changing our atmosphere and climate towards the other extreme. Once we learn both ways than we just need to keep tabs on where the extremes of the climate and atmosphere extend so we know when to begin applying the oppossing force to create a balance point.
Lessee...what other ammo did u supply me with..
Ah, there we are;
As far as "nearly impossible to eliminate a 'carbon footprint' *give me a break* is purely a ridiculous speculation.
First of all, there is a way to eliminate a "carbon footprint" as you would put it; Overwhelm carbon emissions with oxygen emissions, *geez, chemistry 101*
Ok, ne moar ammo? Ah, there's just a few moar rounds in the case.
As far as killing off moar humanz to reduce "carbon footprint" *this is very ridiculous btw* Just realize that every human that is executed using our taxes is us contributing to the very death of our own self-destructive escapisms. Yes, you kill a part of yourself every time you kill another human being. Self-Preservation excluded. You sir are monumental failyour. I suggest moar schooling, but there isn't much to teach a self-proclaimed academic scholar. }:q

I guess that's why they call this forum SCIENCE and MATH ROFL XD!!