Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

spideyboiiii t1_jaf299a wrote

Ethically reprehensible in 95% of cases and practically problematic in 100%.

2

DrunkTankGunner t1_jaf29bs wrote

It doesn’t work to achieve any of its stated goals, and innocent people die

5

SugaRowanie t1_jaf2a9n wrote

I feel like death is too easy. I rather they rot

1

EatYourCheckers t1_jaf2ba2 wrote

too expensive, implementation is too biased in current US justice system

0

MrCCross t1_jaf2g2q wrote

I approve

Let there God sort them out

1

HuguenotPirate t1_jaf2hkw wrote

It's just, effective, and better than the alternatives (lifelong imprisonment and exile).

0

LMNOsteven t1_jaf2hw2 wrote

I don't mind bad people getting killed. But of course, it has to be 100% deffo that they're the ones, which is where the problem is.

2

TornadoesArentReal t1_jaf2i5w wrote

I don't like it, because people do get proven innocent and it's bad enough when you release an innocent person that's been locked up for years but you can't release the dead

2

PotatoAppleFish t1_jaf2j94 wrote

I’d rather see 10 guilty people go free than even run the risk of one innocent person being murdered by the state.

12

CampusTour t1_jaf2kdv wrote

I am open to the argument that some people are just such fucked up psychos that it's better to put them down humanely, than to lock them in a cage until they die on their own, the whole time guarding against the chance that they ever get an opportunity to harm others again.

However, in order to be comfortable actually having any version of that as policy, I'd need to see a justice system that is capable of identifying those extreme cases with 100 percent accuracy, complete fairness to the accused as far as due process goes, and a completely painless and humane method of execution. I'd also like to see one that is aware that the purpose is not punishment, but would be the same sense of tragic necessity as putting down a rabid dog.

2

WoodytheWicked t1_jaf2ow8 wrote

Immoral and also doesn't create a way out for a criminal. Like someone shoots someone, he knows he will be killed, so he shoots plenty more people and ends up killing himself. This is worse for the community.

5

ThePolarBadger t1_jaf2u92 wrote

The government should not have the power to take it's citizens lives

2

AdmiralBofa t1_jaf2wth wrote

I'm against it. Even people who can articulate the goals of it (rare) can't show any evidence that it achieves any of them. It's expensive and morally questionable at best.

1

Jones-bones-boots t1_jaf318n wrote

I never could wrap my head around the fact that we kill people who kill people to show killing is wrong.

4

S4MM-E96 t1_jaf34c6 wrote

I used to be on the fence about it, but after getting into true crime stories, I'm 100% in support of the death penalty. The simple truth is there are some people, not a lot, but some people who absolutely deserve to die.

It's not something that can be summed up in a few small sentences, but that's the basic way I feel.

6

Darklock2022 t1_jaf3nyu wrote

Support it in principle. Oppose it in practice. Too many innocent people executed. And it is not an acceptable price to pay to punish the genuinely guilty. To me it is no different than cops firing their weapons indiscriminately into a crowd to gun down a bad guy. Sure they might hit him but how many innocent bystanders did they take with him? If you can’t accept that scenario, then you can’t accept the death penalty as it exists. But you can still support the concept.

10

ACam574 t1_jaf3ow3 wrote

The criminal justice system is incredibly biased and flawed. Capital punishment is expensive because the system is biased and flawed. More expensive than life imprisonment.

Fix the bias and flaws then we can consider it more widely for certain crimes.

2

RusstyDog t1_jaf3xfu wrote

Executing citizens is too much power for the government to have.

2

S4MM-E96 t1_jaf4675 wrote

Replying to PhreedomPhighter (#2,135,964)

That's why we don't depend on the government to determine who those people are. We depend on juries, made up of our own citizens, and laws and penalties which are decided upon by voting.

Yes, I know this is an ideal and it may not be exactly that way in practice, but still it stands that it's not the government making those decisions.

4

Upstairs-Software830 t1_jaf4cjl wrote

Probably bad, but emotionally satisfying. In practical terms, can be okay if used in extreme rare cases. Definitely practiced too often in most countries.

2

Jones-bones-boots t1_jaf4qbe wrote

Replying to CecilIvanish (#2,135,932)

It’s just a weird notion and even weirder that the “thou shall not do anything against the Bible” states use this as a form of punishment more. I think life behind bars stops them from killing so I’m not sure anyone needs to kill the killers. However, I get how some feel they should be killed.

2

gracekelly73 t1_jaf4v6b wrote

Replying to spideyboiiii (#2,134,973)

I just saw a news report of a women on tape drowning her autistic son in a river. I don’t think she deserves to live. She doesn’t deserve to live for free with room and board. Or have food for her to enjoy or make friends even if it’s in jail. She doesn’t deserve to laugh or breath fresh air. She doesn’t deserve to live. It’s on tape her pushing her son in the river and running away there’s no question of guilty or innocent.

1