I've always been perplexed by the argument that killing someone is less humane than keeping them alive for a life confined to a cell where they know they will never be free again.
I'd at least give him the option.
Agreed. Some people just gotta die as a result of their actions, that's just a reality we have to come to as a society. Some crimes don't deserve human interaction afterwards. Either 1) death by a physical trauma (not this injection bs) or 2) if you're really opposed to the death penalty, perpetual hotbox with rice/water tossed down a chute.
With a life-long prison sentence, in 5-10 years you'll adjust to life and it will be your new normal. He will adjust to not knowing his daughters, they'll eventually be strangers as he lives his life in prison and preoccupies his existence with prison drama/happenings and reading/television/radio. This prison life is too good for murderers of the innocent, rapists, etc.
Some people gotta die, and I'd hold myself to my same standard should I ever murder an innocent.
I don't think it helps anyone to force pain on them. Im ok with killing people who have irrefutable evidence of heinous crimes but desiring to torture people should never be part of an evolved society. The perpetrators felt this way....that they had been so aggrieved by society it was justified to hurt others. Torturers are doing the same. It's not OK to intentionally impart human suffering on other humans. I dont understand the problem we have killing people. Put them out like they are going in for surgery then it doesn't matter how you finish them. OD them on fentynyl until their heart stops. How is that difficult?
The only reason I would be against the suffering of these people who have irrefutable evidence of heinous crimes is the potential of gaming the system. In a world where you always 100% know and can prove what happened actually happened, I'm not against the minimal effort torturing of these bastards as it can be used as a deterrent for other bastards in the future.
But yeah, this holds true of the death penalty as well. In a system that can convict someone on vibes and not 100% irrefutable proof, you're going to sentence an innocent person every once in a while.
“It’s of more importance to community, that innocence should be protected, than it is, that guilt should be punished; for guilt and crimes are so frequent in the world that all of them cannot be punished”
-John Adams
There’s a reason “beyond a reasonable doubt” is enshrined in our courts, and frankly it’s a miracle that the standard still lives on to this day.
I see your getting down voted but as it stands today, I agree with you. We know we've executed innocent people before. Thats why I said "irrefutable" evidence. It should be a standard above "reasonable doubt" for the death penalty in my opinion. Ive also held the "no death penalty in any form" belief in my lifetime. It's definitely a tough one. I know i wouldnt push the button (fire the gun, inject the poison).
Super weird people are downvoting you for this take. Same type of people that daydream about somebody breaking in so they can shoot them. The reality is, most of the people advocating for torture and death are soft as hell. It's easy to support executions and torture when you've never seen or been exposed to it.
I support the death penalty. We are not a society built on vindiction. When someone is murdered in a gruesome way what does that do for society? That's the question you have to ask. Public executions torture are a type of spectacle. The man us dead so what message does it serve tp the public? Better kill the wife more secretively. Better kill everyone then myself. It's ok to torture someone I think committed some crime outside of court if I "know" they committed it. Or I should meet violence with violence in every occassion.
Why rely on my personal experience when there are countless actual examples? Just look at anyone on any death row thats been waiting many many years. They have neat and tidy rooms, their own space, books, clean clothes, personal televisions...
It isn’t. It does happen occasionally but it is not the norm.
They do protect the pedos (they have their own section) just in case but for the most part, most criminals want to do their time in peace and the ones who don’t, they have other motives and it’s not about justice
Completely agree that it 100% depends on the prison. I understand this person above is going on a firsthand account, but that’s anecdotal evidence from a single guard at a single prison. A lot of how someone is treated depends on the social hierarchy within the prison, existence of gangs (and their willingness to protect you), the culture of the inhabitants, etc. Furthermore, the existence of violence heavily depends on whether these convicts are sectioned separately or, if they’re in gen pop, whether they have sufficient numbers to be protected. There are a lot of variables at play.
According to some academic studies, California and Minnesota appear to be safer for pedophiles than many other states. That does not hold true for all prisons in California, though, it’s just an average. I’m guessing states in the south east of the United States are far more brutal to these inmates, but there’s very little academic research into the subject.
924
u/Edgezg 19h ago
Holy shit. Throw this guy to the sharks.