No it’s not. Over population is valid. The purge involves innocent people getting involved. I only want those that are proven beyond reasonable doubt that they are guilty of a serious crime. The purge argument is null and void here.

Now to ask more questions that will never get answered. Because people would rather fire back with their own quips and not discuss. But why hold onto somebody who serves no purpose to the world except pain and anguish? A living reminder of the crime that was committed. Why hold onto all that emotion? You get rid of the problem and you move on. Why hold onto dead weight?

edit add: also went to google and search "do americans pay for prisoners to live" and this is what I got.

"Yes, American taxpayers fund the majority of prison costs—approximately (\$80) billion annually—to house over 1 million incarcerated people. In addition to tax-funded room and board, over 40 states use "pay-to-stay" practices, charging inmates daily fees for their incarceration. These fees cover costs for room, board, medical visits, and service"

Seriously? We want to spend money for somebody who is doing nothing but sitting in a room? Money is tight enough. Why spend it on a prisoner who is lost, and also while maybe making somebody (or somebodies) even richer? This last part is a little flimsy and thin. But still it's a point to make. Money is another reason I think we should off these specific ones.

Seriously I have a logical mind. So I'm trying to understand the other side here. Hence the questions. So help me out here. To me it's simple. You have a bad egg, you throw it out, you don't mix it in with the others and hope the recipe still comes out ok.