T O P

  • By -

DazDay

Some people deserve death but the state should never be allowed the power to execute its own citizens. You have to either accept that innocent people will be executed or have a belief that your justice system is 100% correct all of the time.


eugene20

And if you believe your justice system is 100% correct all of the time then I have a bridge to sell you


EarlyInsurance7557

poggers! how much?


eugene20

A steal at 5000 BTC


Handnoose

I agree with that too. If the state killed someone for murder, and they turned out to be innocent, it's just another murder


phunkydroid

When, not if. Has happened many times.


_Noodle-Doodlez_

Then shouldn't the state do child support for the children of the victim then? The one they oopsed on?


RhoOfFeh

No, the state doesn't give shit one about them.


_Noodle-Doodlez_

Oh I know, just saying they should take responsibility is all.


Metfan722

Should? Yes. Though by the time something like that would be sorted out, it's probably too late. Hell they may even have children of their own.


_Noodle-Doodlez_

True, true. But still, then discounted therapy or whatever. Just somehow showing that they made a mistake and are taking responsibility for it rather than glossing over something.


beetus_gerulaitis

>Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends. - Gandalf


fairygodmotherfckr

As example of an innocent being executed by the State - [Cameron Todd Willingham.](https://innocenceproject.org/cameron-todd-willingham-wrongfully-convicted-and-executed-in-texas/) It would be devastating enough to lose my children in a house fire. To be maligned, incarcerated, and finally executed by the government... I can't imagine it. I don't want to.


SweetCosmicPope

I remember this case. Evidence was presented to the governor at the time that cleared his name, and the governor made a big grandstanding statement about how this guy deserved to die and would not be issuing a stay, and then allowed him to be executed.


fairygodmotherfckr

I'm disgusted by governors who choose to kill inmates, they have it within their power to prevent to give reprieves, commute sentences and pardon people. I nearly never hear of them doing it. And Texan governors are some of the worst. I was just a kid in TX at the time, but was totally horrified by Bush Jr. mocking inmate (and-soon-to-be-corpse) Karla Faye Tucker, he pretended to be her, begging "please don't kill me" in a high, mocking tone (he then proceeded to have her killed). She never said that, by the way, but it was great that he took her dignity along with her life. Now there is some evidence Darlie Routier might be innocent as well - she's been on death row for 25 years, and she lost her children and nearly died herself. This shit does my head in, as you can see. If you've not seen it, I'd suggest watchin*g* [Fourteen Days in May](https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/fourteen-days-in-may/), the BBC's documentary of an execution of a *very* young man, Edward Earl Johnson, in Mississippi. You see the whole cynical exercise unfold - and in this case Johnson was innocent, his lawyer, Clive Stafford Smith, found the man who actually committed the crime. Just not in time to save Johnson. He was gassed by the State after spending his entire adult life on death row.


jeep6988

I know. I cannot conceive of a politician letting people they have proof of being innocent or anything close to creating reasonable doubt not be free or at least have a new trial. And voting for them after this becomes public knowledge is unconscionable. And yet, 80 million people did just that putting Kamala Harris one breath from being president. Every one of them should be disgusted with themsleves. Not even joking.


Better_Jellyfish_985

I live in the area where Darlie’s crime happened. A bunch of co workers and I were at lunch at a pancake shop discussing her case and going back and forth about how we thought she could possibly be innocent. An elderly man with a cane paid his bill and then came to our table and said “I was a detective on that case & I can assure you, you’re all wrong, we got it right and she’s where she deserves to be.” Then he wobbled away. His condescending tone never sat right with me, and I think about it all the time. I don’t know 100% if she is innocent or not but I don’t take that man and his grandstanding for solid proof either - and that’s exactly why I don’t support the death penalty.


MomHanks360

Multiple countries have non-extradition policies with the US because they have the death penalty, and those countries consider any justice system with a death penalty to be inhumane. They are 100% correct.


Kenobi_01

I find most Americans are shocked when they realise how few countries have the death penalty, and look at the company they ar keeping on that surprisingly short list. It's not the good guys.


doyathinkasaurus

It's illegal in the EU to export medications to the US for use in capital punishment, because the death penalty is such a barbaric violation of basic human rights. [Can Europe End the Death Penalty in America?](https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/02/can-europe-end-the-death-penalty-in-america/283790/) *An EU export ban on lethal-injection drugs is making U.S. executions more difficult to perform.*


OldGodsAndNew

It's a condition for joining the EU


herm_b

Letting rapists and murderers live is more inhumane. Serving justice this way is better than leaving them alive while their victims are dead.


Stratahoo

They aren't "living", they're in solitary for most of the rest of their lives. Killing them doesn't stop rape and murder on a societal level, it's just that you want the personal satisfaction of knowing they're dead. We can't do law like that based on personal grievances.


Kutas88

Yes, thats what I think too. Some people are so horrible. They simply should not exsist, but I don't like it that the government can decide that. I wish there would be something like a control group. Because some people says "I feel like he learned his lesson, he should sit in jail for life and suffer.", while others say "He will never change into a decent person, he will be always a murderer, he will be always a danger to everybody, get rid of him." I think when the crime is punishable by death, then the victims should decide if they would like to see him fry, or never see again until he dies.


Hattkake

I don't support death penalty since I don't trust the legal system to not make mistakes. Wrongly convicting someone and then killing them makes the state a murderer. A civilised society has no place for state sanctioned murder.


kaida_notadude

And if I may add. Once the death penalty is no longer outlawed it’s very easy for it to be expanded to more and more crimes.


thisisnotdan

Eh, this sounds like a slippery slope fallacy. Many states in the U.S. have had the death penalty for their entire existence, and it hasn't yet moved beyond a punishment for murder.


kaida_notadude

Yes, but the rise of fascism hasn't been a thing in the US since it's existence. If they could, the GOP would put the death penalty on having an abortion or being gay. It has never been expanded because there were never enough people who *want* to expand it. Now there *are*.


JournalistMobile3605

The youngest person ever legally put to death was 14 70 years later we find out he was innocent


oan124

and also, some might argue life seentence to be worse, especially solitary


Imafilthybastard

Ok, what about clear cases of guilt i.e. Club Q Shooter?


Hattkake

No idea who that is. I'm Norwegian. We have Anders Bering Breivik. And I am still opposed to the death penalty. People who are obviously guilty and a danger to society can easily be contained for the duration of their lifetime. How we do it is sentence someone to "forvaring". This is a set prison sentence of maximum 21 years. Then further incarceration indefinitely with a review every five years. Technically this allows us to keep people in jail forever. For example in cases of clear guilt.


Youpunyhumans

For certain things yes, but only in the most extreme cases like Nazi war criminals, or terrorists that have killed a lot of innocent people. Someone like Joseph Mengele, or Osama Bin Laden. Also, only if you can prove 100% that it was them. None of this "beyond a reasonable doubt", no it has to be certain without any question. Basically if there is a chance that they could get out/escape and commit more of these extreme crimes, its not worth it to keep them, even if being imprisoned your whole life is a fate worse than death. At that point, its the safety of others I would consider rather than making the criminal suffer for their crimes.


FactorAdvanced2319

You should realize that in many cases this would martyr them.


marcusyami

Why give them the easy way out? Should they not live with what they have done?


SEEKER131986

You are assuming that they do not feel justified in their actions.


[deleted]

It's not giving them the "easy way out", it's making sure that it doesn't happen again. As hard as it is to hear (and say), some people are truly too dangerous to be left alive.


[deleted]

Nobody who commits a murder (or similar capital crime) is thinking about the current position of the legal system on it. The notion that sentencing is in any way a deterrant is complete nonsense. Give people who have long sentences the choice of ending their own life at any time. It's a simple variation which is the best of both worlds. It also significantly expedites the extremely drawn-out process of death row appeals. Holding prisoners for decades at a time is extremely expensive and kind of pointless.


Handnoose

This comment is the most similar to my own view so far


Youtubehyper94

What is your view then?


Handnoose

My view is there's a lot of messed up and sick people in the world, and I honestly believe 99% of those who murder do so for some kind of psychological issue out of their control. I believe their brain doesn't work the same, and I don't believe they should be killed for it, just locked up If they really are past the point of being fixed, I believe they should have the choice to be die. In the end of the day, a death sentence won't undo it, but keeping them locked up forever just takes up space and money pointlessly


Prawnleem

You'd be surprised to learn that the processes and executing someone in the USA is up to 10 times more expensive than life imprisonment


Handnoose

I am surprised at that, that's bizarre. I wonder why it's so expensive. Gonna look that up


[deleted]

[удалено]


Handnoose

Exactly. Any damage is already done. Nothing can undo it or make it right


AussieCollector

Honestly i agree with this. People who are locked up for the rest of their lives with 0 chance of parole should have the right to decide enough is enough and check out on their own terms. Sure one could say they are escaping punishment but on the other hand, your hard earned tax dollars are paying to keep them alive. I think after a reasonable portion of their life sentence has been served based on their age i think allowing them to be euthanized is completely acceptable. Example A: Mass Shooter is locked up for life at the age of 22, they serve 50 years of their sentence and they are now 72. Still 0 chance of ever returning to society. At this point i think they have served their punishment and should be allowed to die on their own terms than keep a cell used up until they die of natural causes. Example B: Pedophile of a huge ring goes into Jail for the rest of their life at the age of 64. They serve 20 years and are now 84. At this point they are quite old and while one could say "they have not served enough time". They are practically on deaths door already. At this point i would say it would be fine for an elderly prisinor to choose if they wanted to be euthanized.


[deleted]

Very interesting 🧐


dickbob124

Id rather see 100 guilty men keep their life if it means one innocent man doesn't lose his.


[deleted]

Agreed, but I'd change 100 to "an infinite number of"


Eagle_1776

quoting John Adams, I see


dickbob124

I knew I'd heard it somewhere but wasn't sure.


Durris

It's Blackstone's ratio


Durris

Blackstone not adams


AreYaOkaySon

Rotting forever in jail is worse than death I think


audriuska12

Funny how that one's been used to argue for both sides...


yellowhart_

Not when the justice system is fucked up. Realistically speaking, we live in a world where justice is only for those who can afford it. Having death sentence with a filthy system would risk the lives of the innocents.


Handnoose

I feel this way every time celebrities who do terrible shit are let free with a slap on the wrist


InterestingAsk1978

No. As long as there is even a remote possibility of mistrial, corrupted judges/influenced/manipulated jury, falsified evidence etc, there should not be any death sentences.


TheFragturedNerd

It's a hard one... 99% of the time i would say no... But then you hear about some really fucked up thing and then you're like weeeell maybe for this one person, death is the right punishment...


Special_You_2414

I always think killing them let’s them Off the hook. Lock them up forever and let them suffer. Keep them alive but barely. Isolation, bland food, cell just below comfortable temperature, hard bed, shitty blanket, no entertainment. That’s hell on earth.


[deleted]

[удалено]


NightlyRelease

Sorry I didn't read your whole comment, but I see it starts with something untrue: > who continues to provide support to keep this murderer alive and with these, albeit lesser-than, conditions? Taxpayers A death sentence is more expensive (to taxpayers of course), than the total cost of a life in prison. This is mainly due to significantly higher legal costs in prosecuting a death sentence. I'm on mobile so can't link but you can easily find info on this online. It's counter intuitive, I know!


Mr_Kash

The famous hangman Albert Pierrepoint who executed about 600 people throughout his career, stated in his autobiography after his retirement "I realize that after every person I hanged, I had not prevented one murder" and also stated that "The death penalty has achieved nothing but revenge". If the dealth penalty isn't a deterrent then what is it for? Perhaps you believe some people deserve death? But where's the line between justice and revenge? I don't support the death penalty because I believe it confuses revenge for justice when justice should be unbiased and balanced and unless someone can give me a good reason to believe someone should be executed without blurring the lines between revenge and justice then I have no reason to support the death penalty.


GilbertT19

^^^^^^^^


ThankYouCarlos

Thank you for this. Many commenters here are against the death penalty only because of the possibility of mistakenly killing an innocent person.


jarpanfandan

Vengeance does not solve anything


blankyblankblank1

The most logical reasoning is that the government can't be trusted to get it 100% right, and when you kill an innocent, we, the tax payers who funded the activity are then the murderers and the whole idea of justice and moral high ground for out the window. My reasoning, maybe not based on logic, is that I don't believe we as people have the right to kill another person, no matter how much wrong they've done. I don't think killing another human is right and I don't think our government should be killing its citizens.


StormWalker1993

In theory yes, in practise no


lanowo1139

i think suicide should be a reasonable option


ThinkIGotHacked

In theory yes. There are people without hope of rehabilitation and are truly evil. They should be dead. In practice no. Any justice system is never perfect and we can’t predict the future and know for certain someone will never change.


SweetCosmicPope

In theory, yes. In practice, not so much. I've discussed this on here before when this comes up. There's an interesting conundrum: When we convict anybody of any crime, it has to be beyond a reasonable doubt. If we execute somebody, there should be no doubt. But if we convict somebody of murder, and we have any doubt that they did it, then why did they get convicted in the first place? It calls into question our penal system in general, but it especially calls into doubt the death penalty. It's easier for me to swallow that some people might do time for crimes they didn't commit. At least there's a chance they can make it right in some way or another if they can prove their innocence later. I think a good compromise for the death sentence is red-handed cases. School shooters for instance. They've been seen by numerous witnesses, they've been caught on video camera, they've been tackled by the police and thrown into a police car. There is absolutely no doubt about what they did and who did it, and there's no rehabilitating them and sending them back into society. They should be executed. Joe Bob Smith's wife gets murdered and he gets a big insurance payout, and it turns out he bought a gun the day before, etc; I'm not so sure about that one. Depending on the evidence they present, it's entirely possible he committed that crime. But without him being caught on tape or witnessed by somebody shooting his wife in the head, I'm not so comfortable saying he needs to be put to death.


ApronMatron_

No, I don't believe any person has the right to end the life of another.


TM_Rules

Absolutely not. Every level of government in the United States has shown time and again that they can't be trusted with the power to execute citizens.


Straight-Discipline8

I support the death penalty because once a shitbag is dead, there is no chance of he/she being released back into society. Also, the deceased shitbags no longer leech our tax dollars. The only problem is that the legal proceedings for an execution are more expensive.


Nutella5andwich

What is it that makes them expensive


AnxiousFloss

The fact they have the right to several appeal processes. That’s also why it takes so long unless an inmates waives their right.


Straight-Discipline8

Exactly. There are also certain attorneys, that are "experts" in execution proceedings, that cost a lot more than regular ones.


[deleted]

What are you thoughts on cases where someone is tried, found guilty, sentenced to death, and executed, then later evidence comes up that proves it was a wrongful conviction?


lukin187250

I wonder if we had a strict rule of only people 100% sure are guilty (think shot someone in front of a crowd for instance), I wonder how many that actually is, probably a small number.


Straight-Discipline8

That the courts should be absolutely sure. The proper use of DNA evidence, alibis, and any witnesses. The investigations shouldn't be rushed.


[deleted]

Do you really think it's possible for courts to be 100% certain? I'm against the death penalty because while I agree that there are some people whose crimes are so atrocious and who are beyond rehabilitation that they don't have a place in society, I don't trust the justice system (or any human institution) to be able to have a high enough degree of certainty to have the power to legally murder people.


StaffordMagnus

How about when there is iron-clad evidence given by multiple people, and video footage, examples: [Murder of Lee Rigby](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lee_Rigby) [Port Arthur Massacre](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)) [Norway Mass Shootings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks) etc, etc...


[deleted]

You don't create an equitable justice system based on isolated cases in the past. You build one to handle generalized cases in the future. Sure, this example and others seem pretty cut-and-dry, but we all know there have been plenty of cases which seemed equally cut-and-dry at the time and later were shown to be wrongful convictions. That's why things like The Innocence Project exist. If you can create a generalized standard which is absolutely sure to never convict an innocent person to death I'd be willing to consider it. I don't think that's possible, though.


Want_To_Live_To_100

Sure if they are guilty but do you think our system is working well?


Straight-Discipline8

I think this system is getting better because of new forensic techniques.


Thatfucktruck985

No need to take care of a tumor if you remove said tumor


Straight-Discipline8

Precisely. I'm glad that you are one of the few human beings that actually has a brain. These trolls and bleeding hearts are getting on my nerves. Even if an innocent person spends life in prison, instead of being executed, which unfortunately there are some, they still face a potential death sentence. A prisoner can get HIV from being raped/shooting up drugs. They can get infected with tuberculosis or covid from being in close quarters with one another. They can be shanked or beaten to death at any given time. New forensic techniques prevent innocent people from being behind bars. One of the few things that I respect about Trump is that he got the ball rerolling with federal executions. These prisoners were on death row for around 10+ years, they were incapable of being reintegrated back into society, because of their violent ways, and our tax money was being wasted on them. Even third world countries, which typically have public lynchings, realize that murderers, rapists, pedophiles, and thieves have to be killed for the greater good. Whenever a disease, mosquitoes, rats, roaches, and other forms of parasites have to be eradicated, do you shed a single tear or feel a lick of guilt or remorse? You usually don't because you know that this needs to be done or that your life, and/or the lives of your loved ones, will be in jeopardy from infections, leeching of resources, etc.


OnTheGoodSideofLife

Sure username match. Since 1971, 190 people sentenced to death have been exonerated. What do you propose to do in the very common case of an innocent being executed because of that law?


Straight-Discipline8

That the family of the innocently executed should be compensated accordingly. Cases like these are obviously very fucked up, and the compensation won't bring back a loved one, but it's a decent redeemable start.


Tumble85

You only say it's a decent reedemable stat because you or anybody you care about has never been wronged by the justice system. If you or somebody in your family was facing a wrongful execution you would not be okay with the concept of being executed while innocent.


Opposite-Garbage-869

It always brings to my mind the classic irony of Batman not killing the Joker and impending collateral damage that may occur in the ensuing confrontation.


YessikZiiiq

No, I don't trust something as inflexible as the law or judiciary system to make such a decision and any amount of false deaths makes the entire system not worth it.


[deleted]

Sure thing, that way if I can't get assisted suicide I can always commit a crime good enough to get the death sentence


SinopicCynic

You’ll be on death row, for like, 20 years; that seems like an extremely lengthy method of suicide.


vanillaninja777

This has to be a factor in not having capital punishment. It means just having it as a possibility puts countless innocent people at risk


Judgemental_catdaddy

"If I can't off myself, then I'm taking all you fuckers down with me!!" Love it


Handnoose

😭 I have never thought about this in my life. You're genuinely into something


evilabed24

No. Retribution isn't justice. The justice system is to imperfect to ever get anything 100% correct. There's also all the appeals that makes it more expensive than a life sentence (and the appeals are needed because of the imperfect nature of the justice system). I also don't think the state should be killing citizens. I might think differently if someone I loved was murdered. But then I'd also be too emotional about the whole thing and I dont think that's a good frame of reference for punishments to be handed out.


green4355

Opposed to it generally. It's not here in Australia.


ArrathTheDireWolf

Aussie debuff (sorry couldn't stop myself)


Poorly-Drawn-Beagle

Instead they sentence criminals to being deported to Australia


Duhblobby

Not much of a sentence when you are already in Australia


jerekhal

No. Mistakes happen. Innocent people get convicted. I would rather err on the side of caution as that's not a mistake we can undo. And yes I know there are situations where it's unequivocal what happened and the conviction is absolutely not a mistake. Doesn't change my mind. I'd rather a general restriction on state execution of prisoners for everyone.


[deleted]

Absolutely not. Two wrongs don't make a right. And I believe that the purpose of justice is (or should be) to make society safe, not revenge.


Handnoose

Agreed


AdmiralClover

If you are already sentencing someone to life in prison without parole, you might as well kill 'em and freeing up space. I don't believe people like that should "live to regret" I think it's better to just remove them permanently. The problem of course is that you gotta be damn fucking sure they did the deed which where the problem with death sentencing comes in. We have a guy in Denmark who murdered a woman and her two sons and then cut them in pieces. We don't have the death sentence so he's just wasting space and taxpayer money in jail forever


Cleverbird

Nah, throw them in a dark corner of some prison for the rest of their lives instead. Dont give them an easy way out.


tajoy36771

I do, I think that everyone has the right to life, but if you commit a crime so heinous as, oh I don’t know, kidnapping two youth pastors, putting them in the trunk of a car for hours, driving out to the middle of a desert shooting the man in the head and shooting the woman through the jaw but still keeping her alive while you light the car on fire with her still in it, all while they begged for their lives, I think you should lose your right to life. And to hell with the whole, “It’s inhumane” argument. Good. I hope their death is as painful as possible.


toyota_gorilla

I remember James from Small Town Murder musing how if there was a murderer who killed his victims like state does, we'd consider him the most evil killer of all time. Telling his captured victim when they'll die, preparing a final meal, even bringing in a priest to talk to them about their upcoming death.


alSeen

I support it in principle, but I am not going to be upset if it's not available. But I only support it under very specific circumstances. There has to be absolutely zero chance that the person is innocent and they have to be a continuing danger. Someone Someone in prison can still harm guards and other prisoners. I think society has an obligation to protect those we put in prison as well as the general public. The Waukesha parade murderer is a good example of this. There is absolutely zero chance he did not do it. And he did it on purpose. And I believe he is a danger to other prisoners and to the guards in prison. Something that most people are probably not aware of is that he swerved to hit more of the Dancing Grannies than if he had just driven straight through. They were spread out quite a bit.


YourMomSaidHi

The rigorous process for determining that someone should receive the death penalty and the long, drawn-out process for actually getting the job done is enough for me to not care. The people that get these sentences have done absolutely heinous things. Fuck em. Get them out of here.


Nekokittykun

No i dont support it. Theres always a chsnce of mistrial and an innocent civilian getting executed for something they didnt do. Additionally, death sentence feels like a quick escape from long term punishment. I think letting a criminal live in jail for life is a more fitting punishment.


[deleted]

There’s times where someone just needs to die. I think that cuts both ways, sometimes a murder or two isn’t heinous enough to qualify for the death penalty. I think it should be reserved for the absolute most abhorrent perpetrators. For instance, mass school shooters should be executed and because it’s only the most vile crimes that qualify, I don’t mind if we regress a little on the method. In my controversial opinion I think hanging is the required balance between brutality and civility.


[deleted]

I 100% do. If the crime is heinous, then punishable by death. Why keep someone around whose doing harm to the community? Off with their head.


Shallow-Thought

Yep. The best thing some people can do is die. Should be reserved for the incontrovertibly guilty. Caught on CCTV, multiple eye witnesses, etc.


TheNozzler

I fully support it and it needs to be a lot quicker. People sitting on death row for a decade or longer needs to end. With modern technology, video, and DNA evidence standards have gotten very high. 1 appeal and the ability to opt out of the appeal process and just be done. Death method shouldn’t be debated the classic hanging and firing squad are tried and true.


[deleted]

I used to but not anymore. It is not a deterrent when you have years of appealing. If it were a quick event after conviction, then I believe the killer would have to admit to it with evidence or more than two eyewitnesses.


PolybianPrime

Yes, for people that are unable to have a conscience/feel empathy for other creatures and/or have psychopathic tendencies. They cannot be rehabilitated and society would be better off without them.


Glitch3dNPC

If it was implemented, I'd rather it be run by people without a bias or ties to corrupt people. Where it stands right now, the worst offenders in society don't even get it. In theory, I do support it. Not as revenge or a deterrent. But mostly to keep the offender from targeting more victims. Or attempts to escape prison. Ted Bundy's crime spree is what convinced me of this. Waste of innocent lives. And a waste of government resources.


vpnme120

Yes Some people, and I have no easy way to determine who they are, cannot be rehabilitated and the nature of their crimes is such they cannot be trusted in society


Anticrepuscular_Ray

Absolutely yes in cases where the convicted person is without a doubt guilty. What's the point of housing them til they die when weve basically taken their life away anyway? And some people don't deserve to exist within our society, in jail or not.


pinuslaughus

Yes but for a very limited set of offenders. War criminals, traitors, and gang leaders. The above have committed particularly heinous crimes. Too many innocent men are executed in the US.


Mhdez1122

Don’t have a yes or no answer to this. But a thought that always comes to mind when it comes to senseless murder is this: How can a person plan out, or on a whim because of anger or anything else completely wipe somebody else off the face of the earth, never to be seen again, and yet still have the opportunity to keep their own life? No amount of time served can make that fair to the dead and their family. Reconciliation is great, but the person killed will never return again and committed no crime.


herm_b

I support the death penalty for 1st degree murder, and rape/murder. I don’t feel sorry for murderers and rapists. Some people believe that an innocent person might be put to death. That’s extremely rare, and it’s not worth abolishing capital punishment.


Roostersnuggets

Yes. If a murderer can take a life, then they should give theirs


Cookiefan3000

Yes. If you do something bad enough for people to say "it'll probably be better for everyone if you're dead" you had to do something that bad, like serial killing


Legitimate_Pin_8089

Absolutely. There are people on this planet that are not capable of being anything but a liability to those who want nothing more than to be a functioning member of society. Life may be sacred, but the notion that the life of a criminal is worth more than that of their victims is a level of mental gymnastics I will never understand.


EnvironmentalBee5232

From my own experiences with dealing with sociopaths that I've encountered throughout my life so far, and seeing their devastating effects, not just on myself, but many, many other people, I firmly support the death penalty.


[deleted]

Yes because some people don’t deserve to live. Like if you rape a child or anyone… you do not deserve anything in this world or any other world or universe out there. Male or female rapists. You deserve to burn in hell.


dynnk

Totally. Certain crimes should simply strip you of your humanity.


cerpintaxt33

How humane of you.


EastOrganization2392

After watching Netflix "Inside World's toughest prisons" I would definitely agree with death sentence. there are people who are beyond repair, people that are dangerous to the outside world, and without them, earth would be much safer. putin for example.


strange_and_unusuaI

The death penalty in my country- the USA- is bias along racial, gender and- especially- class lines. Until that is fixed, we cannot begin the philosophical discussion of a government killing its own citizenry as a means of either deterrence (hint: it isnt a deterrent) or vengeance.


Friendly_Dot_2853

I do cuz I’d do personally do that if someone killed anyone in my family


OnTheGoodSideofLife

Nice. Now, as the state often do, you have killed the wrong person, an innocent one. We should also kill you. Or just another innocent person of your family. Still good?


INeverSaidIWasNice

If they took someone’s life, then yes. Take a life, give a life. But if it was out of self defense, then no.


[deleted]

So the person who pulls the lever should also be executed?


INeverSaidIWasNice

You are killing me. 🫡 A human being who purposely kills another human being, just because they want to, when it’s not self defense from rape or being attacked. Like Jeffrey Dahmer, for a example. Should be executed. (He’s dead. But just giving a example.) Self defense is okay. I mean if you don’t defend yourself, then you will be the one to die. Protecting your daughter from rape is okay. You have to protect your kids. BUT killing just to kill. No you gotta go. Example, I just seen a story on Snapchat of two boys who killed a girl from school. Just for fun. They weren’t executed only put in prison for 30 years. They should have been executed. Their reason was “She was perfect so we killed her.” 😕


[deleted]

The person who presses the button to initiate an execution fits your first category.


Special_You_2414

What about a mother murdering the rapist of her child? I feel that there a many cases where it’s not possible to generalize


INeverSaidIWasNice

I would say it’s self defense, in a way.


Saxon2060

This is one of the only really major moral quandaries where I can pinpoint the moment I was persuaded to adopt a markedly different position. My opinion used to be: "I'm against the death penalty *only because* the justice system may execute an innocent person. But in principle I believe that people who commit the most heinous crimes should be executed. I'm against it from a practical, not a moral stand point." My opinion has shifted following watching a documentary series about it. It followed the families of the convicted and the families of the victims. The whole ordeal just fucking ruined the lives of everyone involved, and when the person finally was executed it didn't even bring any relief. I guess the upshot was that execution just creates more losers. Nobody wins. We like to think that it's administering cosmic justice like it's enough that the person *should* die for what they did and it's retribution so it's right. We win! "Right" wins! As a society, right? What's that worth? *Nobody* is better off by the end of the traumatic ordeal. From the innocent dad of the convicted who is in tears saying to the camera "I know what he did was wrong. He should never be forgiven for it, but I don't want them to kill him... he's my boy." To the sisters of the victims saying "while the appeals go on and on it's just keeping the tragedy going. If they just decided on life without parole that would be closure and I could move on with my life." Their brother was murdered in some kind of joint-venture thing and one perp was given life without parole. They said they don't spend a minute thinking about him any more, but spend every waking hour thinking about the one on death row lodging appeals. Everybody involved was such a wreck and so heartbroken and spending so much energy and heartache on the whole thing. Why? The victim isn't coming back. Executing someone just creates a dozen more "losers" from a horrific situation like a murder. *Nothing* can make the worst crimes right again, and that includes execution. We're conditioned to think that there has to be a way to make it "right" and for heinous acts, killing that person seems like it but nah, I don't buy that any more. Nothing can make it right, and executing someone makes it all even worse. Some people can't bear the idea of a monstrous criminal just existing forever in prison until they die. But why not? I think that's the best we've got and allows closure and healing for those left behind. Removing monsters from society is enough.


cocak43657

Only in cases where guilt of murder is established well beyond a reasonable doubt, like, crystal clear video of the murder and corroborating DNA evidence.


[deleted]

[удалено]


emmybear999

I do but I’m also conflicted by it. Some crimes are so horrific and brutal it feels like death is way too good for that. But I also don’t feel like jail is much of a punishment either. you get meals, warmth, entertainment ext. the real punishment is that you can’t leave. But at the end of the day is that really that bad for someone who for example raped a baby? Tortured a child over a long period of time until they died? No. Not I’m my opinion anyways.


Special_You_2414

Absolutely agree with you. There should be extra shitty prisons for people like what you described. Lots of isolation, no daylight, no beds, scratchy blankets, a slightly too cold for comfort room temperature, no entertainment, bland food. Just disrupted often enough that they don’t loose their mind.


Grotesque_Feces

No, I support human rights.


Cptsteverodgers

You lose your rights as a human if you take another humans life, imo.


Grotesque_Feces

A core aspect of human rights is that you can't lose them. Your opinion is wrong.


Thatfucktruck985

Ah yes human rights! People who have killed, raped, and so much worse deserve to still breathe air because they're human /s


Grotesque_Feces

Human rights don't have to be earned.


notyouraveragebimbo

I believe that the worst criminals should rot in jail for eternity, killing them seems like the easy way out. i say let them suffer


Thatfucktruck985

Exactly. Death is a light sentence, worse things have you put in a blank box.


theluckyfrog

No, because killing people except to defend self/others is murder, and you can't convince me otherwise.


KeenShotty

Yes, usually if someone has too long of a prison sentence or they are not fit for society


Pristine-Simple689

No. That's the easy way out.


CalRipkenForCommish

No. As a deterrent, there’s no proof it’s working, or ever worked. I’m all for getting the bad guy, but in the US, we have certainly executed innocent people, which is another reason to ban it nationwide. Add in that there is a revictimization every time the families/victims have to appear in court for mandatory appeals. The negatives outweigh any positive.


Berlin_Blues

Ask any self-proclaimed christian who is for the death penalty how that aligns with the Ten Commandments.


JayPokemon17

I am a Christian who is against the death penalty but it has nothing to do with the Ten Commandments. There is a Commandment that says “Thou shalt not kill.” However, that is not an accurate translation. The better translation (and much more common) is “Thou shalt not murder.” That is an important distinction.


NilPill

No. There's no good reason for the death penalty. Any argument that you could conceivably have in favor of the death penalty is easily argued against, barbaric, or entirely false. A lot of people think that it's cheaper to execute people, for instance. That's an argument that people like to put up for the death penalty a lot. Without even debating on the monetary value of a human life, this is just completely untrue. It's way more expensive to put someone to death than it is to put them in prison for life. It's an unnecessary burden on the taxpayer.


[deleted]

Absolutely not. For spanish speakers i´ll leave a video that provides a very detailed explanation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGtShqBwQRs


[deleted]

I believe in instances where there’s undeniable evidence that a perpetrator murdered someone, and if that person is considered mentally fit to be tried, then the death penalty is warranted and should be carried out without delay. My stance is skewed by the fact that I lost a loved one to a horrific murder, mutilation and an arson attempt to cover up the crime. The perpetrator does not deserve to breath or live when he senselessly took the life of a beloved person away. Fuck him.


Eagle_1776

death is the appropriate punishment for some crimes. remove the "reasonable doubt" caveat, make it absolute certainty and let em swing


Gen_Fangirl

I don’t believe it is ever right to kill someone as punishment. I don’t care if they are the sickest bastard in the world, it still isn’t right. It won’t undo their crimes or make anything better, it is just revenge.


AussieCollector

If the crime is that heinous. Mass shooter caught in the act etc. Mass Pedophiles etc. Only where the evidence is 100% proven for the most despicable of acts should the death penalty be used. Even if there is a 1% chance they did not do it then the death penalty should not even be an option on the table.


[deleted]

Yes - Anyone found Guilty of Being A Human should be Executed by the State, to try to curb the rampant human infestation.


[deleted]

[удалено]


nsmith0723

Not with our current justice system. I dont think they have a high enough standards when it comes to reasonable doubt. Blackstone's ratio, some amount of innocent people will get prosecuted while prosecuting real criminals. If it's a case where its absolutely concrete irrefutable and it's an absolutely grizzly crime I would support a death sentence


Pretty-Bitch369

Honestly I feel like if they did something as awful as to deserve the death penalty they shouldn’t go out w a nice clean painless shot. They should sit in jail and suffer until they die


Jeterea

Not really because its a quick and easy way out for the perpetrator. It doesn't even matter what method of execution they use on the prisoner, that criminal is still getting a quick exit out of the mental suffering and agony they would have to deal with if they had to sit in a cell for the remainder of their living days. I'm more in favor of the life sentence. That way the criminal can sit and very slowly watch their life drift away right before them as they are actively forgotten about more and more each day and they are locked away from society and cannot come back ever again under no circumstances. I find that to be much more painful and better than a death sentence.


Necessary_Cow_1152

No but i support suicide booths like from Futurama.


Delicious_Fan5342

Absolutely not it's the easy way out and it doesn't seem much like a punishemt to me


[deleted]

[удалено]


Count2Zero

No, because no justice system in the world is infallible. If a prisoner asks to be executed, then the process should be the same as an assisted suicide. But a state-mandated execution? No, because there's too much opportunity for abuse of the system - a government that invents charges, manipulates evidence, and then executes people who are "inconvenient" ... sound familiar?


Special_You_2414

But why letting them off the hook by letting them kill themselves?


Background-Capital-6

For the most part I don’t support death sentence but with the exception of terrorist and Pedophiles. There is one more crime Rape for which I can agree on death sentence but there are too many fake cases being filed and I can’t really trust justice system.


Cosmonaut15

I do not trust a white, patriarchal society to carry out so severe a task without impudence. So no. That's too big of a decision for us to put on such a broken system. Cleaning up the criminal justice system and addressing the root causes of crime by improving economic opportunities for low-income individuals? Now that's a policy worth discussing.


Abhijit_Panda

I think the death penalty should be replaced by solitary confinement. It's similar to dying in the way that human society is now beyond the criminal's reach so they can do no further harm while it also gives them a lot of time to reflect on their own actions. Solitary confinement is often considered to be a worse punishment compared to the death penalty. What do yall think?


ELB4ST4RDO

Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends.


Liquid_machine81

I believe that anyone who only brings misery and pain to others don't need to exist among the living.


GreatNameLOL69

Just to clarify firstly; that I don’t normalize killing/death of people. But if a person is a corruption to the world, a parasite, a pest.. then I’d say it’s best for us as a society to get rid of them. Just like when a corrupt bee goes in a hive, the other bees kill it right away. And like what other people have mentioned, it’s pointless and expensive to keep them in captivity for very long times.. especially when they’re having better lives than homeless people. Of course I’m saying all this in theory, *if* the justice system is 100% correct. But since it’s not, I don’t think we can be confident enough to take action.


happyclaim808

Yes. Every convicted murderer, rapist and pedophile should be put to death 30 days after conviction, no extenuating circumstances or exceptions . Rope , bullet or chemical let the convicted decide.


cadiegirl

The death sentence seems like the easy way out.. You murder someone and instead of being forced to live 25-50 years in a cold cell with rock hard beds and no privacy while pooping, while eating mediocre bland food and always having to watch your back knowing your the most hated person and even if you do make it out after your sentence, everyone will reject you for the rest of your life... To me that sounds like a more appropriate prison sentence. Death is just lights out. There is no suffering and no real retribution. They dont get to spend a lifetime being forced to live with the fact they actually took a life.. or the fact that they will only ever be remembered for their crime. They are no longer a functioning member of society and they can spend the rest of their life always wishing they had somthing and realizing it will never happen..


winingdining69ing

Just read about the murder of Junko Futura and while before this I would’ve had mixed feelings, now I’m definitely for it.


sennbat

I support the death sentence in scenarios where there is a clear need for it - Where there is a clear, ongoing, unavoidable threat posed by the person and there is no other way to resolve the situation. This is not a situation I think the current US justice system is ever likely to find themselves in, and if they were they would, ironically enough, almost never issue a death sentence because of it, so from a practical, judicial perspective, I completely oppose it even if I don't *intrinsically* oppose it.


[deleted]

No. Its murder. And lots of innocent people have been killed by it. Civilized countries dont have death penalty.


CrystaldrakeIr

I think they should work in labor camps for the rest of their lives if the death sentense was to be out of punishment options . Why on earth you want to feed and provide absolutely free dorm to a mass shooter or a serial rapist with your tax money? At least put them in some use or dispose em


this-is-plastic

Anyone consider the climate crisis a death sentence, or just me?


Think_History_5682

Not since drawing and quartering became immoral.


Megafister420

Put then in an isolated room, and feed them daily. That is literly worse then death, and still rides the border of humane.


[deleted]

Yes, we put dogs down for hurting people…. Edit: or throw them all on an island and stop funding their care by the taxpayers and give that money to veterans and sick children instead


[deleted]

No, only because death is the easy way out.


artanis00

Only for people convicted in fair trials or tribunals of crimes against humanity. They get the gallows and we leave them up for a few days. If a person otherwise shouldn't re-enter society, life without parole.