> > > None of that costs taxpayers anything, of course. (??) In any case, government should not be bought out of administering justice because an alternative is cheaper.
> >
> > Why does this debate always come down to money? If a compassionate and effective result (which I personally believe would have been achieved in this instance if it weren't for the vigilantes) costs money, why is that such a sin?
>
> Um. Isn't that more or less exactly what I just said?
>
> The "None of that costs taxpayers anything, of course" was a refutation of Zarniwoop's argument that life imprisonment costs money, whereas surveilling them in their freedom somehow does not.

I didn't intend for this to be an attack on Sam, and I apologise for it seeming that way. This was perhaps not the most appropriate point in the thread to hang this comment off, but I was annoyed with the continual references to cost that have occured in this and previous posts.

winter"apologies"mute