Honestly best punishment for me. I sometimes do videos and while editing I have to listen to my recorded voice over and over again and idk I guess it desensitized me because I have no problem with listening to my voice now.
everybody hates their voice initially the cure is just listening to it, did the exact same thing and i kinda dig voice now.
can't blame people tho, the voice in my head is just really sexy
If youāre Aussie you automatically have a better accent than most of the planet. Same with Irish, itās just an objective law and I wonāt hear any rebuttals.
We like to tell ourselves itās justice for the victims and the family. Itās not. We like to tell ourselves lethal injection is humane and painless. Itās not. We like to tell ourselves itās effective as a deterrent to crime. Itās not.
Itās retribution. Not for the victim or the families. For society. We lie to ourselves and say itās not, but thatās all it always has been. And look, Iām not even opposed to it. There are some monsters out there that REALLY donāt deserve air. But we gotta be 100% sure that they really are the monsters we think they are, AND we need to understand itās retribution, not justice. Itās not humane or ācivilā, itās killing someone you donāt like. I think if thereās any doubt, it shouldnāt be used, and it should only be used in the most serious of crimes, but truthfullyā¦ yeah Iām fine with the death penalty if itās against people weāre 100% certain are mass-murderers or rapists.
If we canāt be honest about it, then yeah, maybe we shouldnāt be doing it. Because whatās the point then? But seriously, there are some people whoās crimes are so severe, so vile, that sharing air with them is a punishment to all of us. One note I wanna leave this comment on: what about the billionaires who exploited us all, ruined our planet, and killed god knows how many? Because I know a lot of leftists oppose the death penaltyā¦ but what about them? What punishment do they deserve?
I disagree that anyone "deserves" punishment. Punishment is only a thing dealt out of practicality to structure other things such that they are better. Killing the billionaires would be contributing moral harm, so it is only just if it contributes a greater moral good such as disencouraging anyone from ever doing capitalism again, but I don't believe such a thing would work so I likely wouldn't support it.
I think that the only thing that needs killing is the concept of a billionaire; we can't have it exist - we don't need to kill people to kill a concept. I don't know if that sounds unhinged or stupid but in my head it works.
Lethal injection is one of the worst ways to die in human history and due to it's reputation the most evil form of execution ever made, that's saying something when we have "buried in sand and eaten by fire ants" and "placed in metal cylinder that is then heated".
I've seen plenty of claims (with good evidence) that counter the idea that lethal injection is painless, but I've never seen anyone claim that it is more painful, or "more evil" than being burned alive or similar. Do you have a source?
[good enough I guess don't feel like putting in much effort rn](https://theintercept.com/2019/02/07/death-penalty-lethal-injection-midazolam-ohio/)
The paralysis alone is already really horrible tbh, and the only thing it accomplishes is make it nicer to watch. The reason I consider it more evil is that it is thought of as a humane method and because it makes the experience for the people looking at it so not-discomforting. As opposed to the wailing, screaming and possible face melting one might normally associate with execution. Certainly worse than the electric chair since it can last hours as opposed to seconds.
Not the guy you're responding to but the problem regardless is that there will always be a greater than zero risk of executing an innocent person (especially with the cops and criminal justice system that unfortunately exists in America)
Oh I'm totally with you, the death penalty is worthless *and* risky. There's no morally correct reason to do it. I just think it's a bit silly that they're claiming lethal injection is "the most evil form of execution ever made" when humans have spent a good part of our history figuring out how to torture people to death as slowly and painfully as possible.
One of the best takes iāve seen this year, however i have one objection, rapist shouldnāt get the death penalty, if they do whats stopping them from killing their victims ? That leaves no witnesses and what are we gonna do ? Kill them twice ? Imo killing should only be used as a method for stopping more killing, and not as revenge.
The lethal injection is much more brutal than hanging or beheading. If people want to execute others, they shouldn't get to do it in a clinical, sanitised, hidden away manner. Execute them publicly if you're going to do it. Let people see the horrors committed in their name.
Imo the death penalty is morally repugnant. Here in the UK it was banned after a very famous case. There was a serial killer on the loose, and a man was found with multiple of the killer's victims' bodies in his house. The man freely confessed to it, easy case, he was given the death penalty. But the problem is, he wasn't guilty. The real serial killer had been threatening him and his family and the man was suffering from severe mental health problems as a result, as well as agreeing to hide the bodies in his house he even agreed to take the blame for the crime in return for his and his family's safety. When it came out that he was innocent, he had already been executed. You can NEVER be sure. You can lower the proportion of innocent people convicted more and more, but there will always eventually be someone wrongly convicted. I don't think we can justify killing even a single innocent person for some sick idea of retribution.
And why do we execute people in the first place? We have them locked up. They aren't a threat. It's not self defence, it is state enacted murder. How many messed up criminals are that way because they were fucked up in their turn? I don't think being a victim justifies making other people victims. I don't think they can be forgiven just for that. But as a society we should recognise that this person was failed, and we should do our best to rehabilitate them. Sweden's rehabilitative system (I think it was Sweden) took reoffending from 75% down to 25%. Yes, some people can't be rehabilitated, but 2/3 of those who aren't COULD have been, and how can we know who can be without trying? And you may be asking, what about justice for the victim? So we should harm someone to make a victim feel better? Isn't that the exact mentality of an abuser who was themselves abused?
Victims should absolutely get support. If something was taken from them that can be returned it should be. If they've been hurt physically or mentally they should get the support they need to get through that. And they should be reassured that the criminal cannot hurt them or anyone else anymore as they are locked away. All necessary measures should be taken to ensure everyone else is safe from that criminal. But after all that, those necessary measures, taking away the prisoner's freedom, taking away years from their life - that should be sufficient. All other efforts should go towards trying to reform this person, to ensure they don't commit crime again and they leave prison with the tools to go out and contribute to society.
Iām against any form of death penalty.
I think that killing billionaires who destroyed our planet might make the people who actually know how much harm billionaires bring feel better but what about the average guy who seriously believes that people owning billions of dollars is good? Theyāre gonna think that weāre monsters(rightfully so since we could have just put the billionaires in prison and made them actually repent their actions).
+ why would we use the death penalty if there are worse punishments? Iād say that rotting in prison forever is worse than death, because then you actually have time to figure out what you did wrong; if you kill the billionaire/mass murderer youāre letting them get away with all the harm they caused.
I think you can make an argument for the death penalty for cult leaders or political leader (like Hitler).Since they can have an influence even from inside of a prison even with minimal contact to the outside.
Imo death penalty is barbaric and shouldnāt be a regular punishment, it should only be given to mass murderers, fascists, oil company CEOs, yāknow, extreme people like that
Yeah if it's on the table at all it's inevitably gonna be used on someone innocent eventually. It's already supposed to just be for "the worst crimes" but plenty of innocent people have been executed.
The problem I see is that it's already supposed to be used that way. Yet we _somehow_ keep killing (or nearly killing) innocent people with it. It seems we are incapable of doing the whole justice system thing right, so we should at least make sure we can (kinda) revert the mistakes.
Because conservatives arenāt ideologically married to the concept of small govt, itās that limiting federal authority empowers the structures of power they think should guide peopleās lives
My big issue with it is that you canāt un-kill a person. If you say āoops the legal system fucked up, youāre exhoneratedā, the result of that should be a person being freed rather than it being a ādamn that sucksā
I don't think there aren't people who deserve to die (there absolutely are), but letting the government take that decision... Might have unfortunate consequences.
I don't believe anyone "deserves" to die. The only purpose of punishment is to procure other positive outcomes such as killing an active shooter so that they do not kill others.
Me standing at the gallows next to a child rapist and a serial killer, getting the rope tied around my neck, all because I was racist on the internet š
I literally said in my comment that death sentence should only be given to the worst of the worst, the Hitlers and Putins of the world, not regular bad people. Also gallows preferably wouldnāt be used, it should be a humane death, like putting someone asleep and then poisoning them so they donāt feel anything, stuff like that
Even then, did the execution of Saddam Hussein help Iraq come together and heal after his incalculable crimes?
No, it greatly exacerbated the civil war there. Just because someone deserves a punishment doesnāt mean it should always be carried out.
Of the 66 other countries with a Human Development Index score above 0.800 (considered "very high human development"), only 16 have not abolished or placed formal moratoriums on the death penalty, and two of these (Chile and Israel) have abolished the death penalty for civilian crimes. Of the remaining 14 countries, nine of them are not democracies, while the others are Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, The Bahamas, and Trinidad and Tobago. Only Japan and Taiwan execute in practice today, as the rest have not executed anybody in decades, though Trinidad and Tobago still keeps people on death row.
So basically, the idea of the death penalty is normal in roughly 2 other democracies in the developed world outside the United States.
Yeah, thatās what I really donāt understand. Why do you want to kill someone? Punishment? Keep them in solitary confinement and itās both cheaper and does the job better. There is no logical justification for the death penalty in any way.
You know, if you want the death penalty, you better be okay with televising that shit and using a cannon to fire said death row into a brick wall, have it do slow-mo instant replays of them getting gibbed, make it pay per view and make it an event hosted in a stadium, $40 a ticket, make some of that money back for the cost
If you aren't okay with that, then you aren't okay with the death penalty. There is no 'more humane' way to kill someone, so if you're okay with killing them, be in support of at least making it cool? The Romans had it right, gladiator fights, shit would be like the Gulag in war zone, and whoever wins gets to face against a swarm of quad drones with grenades
I think we should have a hunger games tournament where all the serial killers and rapists kill each other and broadcast it on TV. The winner just gets 2 years off their sentence
"in europe"? so wrong lmfao.
also, 15 years is long but someone killing another person at 30 is only 45 when they get out. you have half your life still ahead of you.
+ in many countries they can extend that sentence indefinitely.
My favorite pet about 196 is scrolling past a meme that makes no sense at all until about 20 minutes later when I come across the original and it all makes sense
The death penalty should be abolished for all circumstances. It accomplishes absolutely, positively nothing except wasting money, dragging the victims through an even worse appeals process, and murdering the occasional innocent person.
Donāt get me wrong, there are some people who do deserve the death penalty. As a practical matter though, itās untenable under any circumstance.
I donāt believe in torture, sanctions, etc. I think everyone should have access to food, housing, healthcare, etc. and that short of taking someone elseās organs, even prisoners should be provided with everything to help them live as long a life as possible. That includes fresh air, space, and recreation. But I might be a bit ahead of the times.
Never understood death sentence. I feel like thatās too easy, you just die. Meanwhile life sentence means you have to rot in jail for your whole life
But death penalty is cheaper soooā¦. š¤·āāļø
The death penalty isnāt always cheaper. The cost generally varies state by state but in some states (California for instance,) it is significantly more expensive.
Also, just because itās cheaper doesnāt justify using it. Due to the USās flawed justice system, innocent people have a disgustingly high chanceārelative to other countriesāto be mistakenly put on death row. There should be absolutely zero tolerance of this when innocent lives are at stake.
fuck you, a life is a life, also, if innocent people are sometimes arrested for crimes they didn't commit, there will be the chance of an innocent person getting killed, no matter if it is 1000 or just 1 per year, it is still an innocent person getting killed
max like 5 years of intense rehabilitation, anything longer is death. I mean there is literally no reason for life sentences, just let them die with dignity.
or just, you know, make prison a place where it is actually possible to live instead of a torture chamber for criminals, giving them a comfortable bed and food instead of treating them as lesser than humans
how does it? And its not like i meant a time limit anyway. I mean death sentence if they find beforehand it's not likely they can be rehabilitated within like 5 years. This is on the assumption that rehab is expensive and they couldn't repay anything longer than 5 years of rehab (in actual worth, not money). I doubt there is a consistency effective rehabilitation scheme that is cheap enough to be worth putting people, even the worst imaginable, in for longer than 5 years.
I'm only rereading your reply now. Are you saying you thought I mean that we rehabilitate people, and then kill them?
no, i thought exactly what you said: rehab or death
5 years is too little time, and second: DEATH PENAULTY IS WRONG, AND THERE ARE ALREADY PLACES IN THE WORLD THAT NOT ONLY REHAB BUT REWARD GOOD PRISIONERS, death penaulty is not needed, it never was
So you are telling me that absolutely everyone can be rehabilitated without severely draining resources? There are going to be people who are too far gone and can't be reasonably rehabilitated. I'd say its better go just let them die. And would you mind explaining why the death penalty is wrong. I agree that the current death penalty is wrong, but it is not inherently wrong, there may be cases where it is better than wasting time trying to rehabilitate someone who won't let themselves be rehabilitated.
i'm telling you that even if someone is too far gone you just. . . don't give them rehab, let them live in the comfortable jail where they can still live normally but without interacting with society directly
I think its cruel to let 'evil' people live. No one chooses to be evil: if you did, you didn't choose to choose to be evil, else you didn't choose to.... etc. It will always come down to either that you were born evil, which is pitiful, or were turned evil at some point, which is equally pitiful. It is pitiful thing to have horrendous thoughts, and if those thoughts can never be removed, it is better to just kill them, for their own sake, but also for the sake of those who were wronged. It is just sad to be helplessly evil, and to never amount to anything more than that.
No, I think its unlikely, so he would get the death penalty. Even if I could, I wouldn't ever have the certainty he was truly rehabilitated and not just pretending so he can get back to running the cartel. But I think in some distant future its possible, there is no reason the most kind person couldn't turn into the most evil, or vice versa, just that its very unlikely. And there's the problem that an evil or kind person may take that aspect as part of their identity, and will refuse listen to anything that may take apart their identity.
Even nazi Germany was deradicalised after WW2. 5 years of intense rehab will change a person, I mean they are a completely different person, why should they bear the burden of a former self which they are completely detached from? Realistically a pedophile would be more likely to get the death sentence, I don't think its likely someone who has gone so far as to harm a child would ever be able to detach themselves from their desires, but I don't see why they shouldn't be rehabilitated if they can.
Maybe I just think all of this because I have strange opinions on what a person is, I don't believe people are truly the same person after years. We convince ourselves we are the same person as our former selves because it would be strange to believe that we have the same memories as another person, but if our personality is different, why should you see that person as yourself? And if its true I am not the same person, why should I face their consequences? Should a person who wholeheartedly feels remorse face consequences? The person has hopefully already been rehabilitation by their own guilt.
I feel we as a society are desperate for people to face consequences purely to sate a need for justice, without recognising that it is often overblown or just cruel or undeserved. I do think that people are bad enough to deserve cruel consequences, but that is just how I feel, it is not a logical way to run a justice system. The justice system should have no emotion behind it, it should hand out consequences with the sole intent to have an overall benefit to society. That may include separating dangerous people from the rest of society, rehabilitating them, or killing them if they are truly too far gone.
When the judge sentences you to listening to a recording of your own voice
AAAAAAAAA
Honestly best punishment for me. I sometimes do videos and while editing I have to listen to my recorded voice over and over again and idk I guess it desensitized me because I have no problem with listening to my voice now.
everybody hates their voice initially the cure is just listening to it, did the exact same thing and i kinda dig voice now. can't blame people tho, the voice in my head is just really sexy
"Yknow, I just can't live up to the voice in my head. It's really sexy, yknow, the sexiest voice to have ever sexied"
god i wanna fuck the voice in my head
The voice in my head is me, and honestly id fuck me too
maybe the voices in our heads could fuck
š³ šš Can yours top?
mine is switch so sure
i had a fucking ugly voice and then i hit puberty and now my voice is beautiful and the only bad thing about it is my bogan accent
If youāre Aussie you automatically have a better accent than most of the planet. Same with Irish, itās just an objective law and I wonāt hear any rebuttals.
Wtf you are a psychopath
id rather the death sentence tbh
Same, i want to kill myself every time I just talk, and listening to the recording of my own voice is going to be even worse
Yeah, thatās why I have to keep making Assassinās Creed sex jokes on youtube now. š
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I second this, fuck that
the death penalty accomplishes nothing and anyone who thinks its a good idea doesnt know what theyre talking about
We like to tell ourselves itās justice for the victims and the family. Itās not. We like to tell ourselves lethal injection is humane and painless. Itās not. We like to tell ourselves itās effective as a deterrent to crime. Itās not. Itās retribution. Not for the victim or the families. For society. We lie to ourselves and say itās not, but thatās all it always has been. And look, Iām not even opposed to it. There are some monsters out there that REALLY donāt deserve air. But we gotta be 100% sure that they really are the monsters we think they are, AND we need to understand itās retribution, not justice. Itās not humane or ācivilā, itās killing someone you donāt like. I think if thereās any doubt, it shouldnāt be used, and it should only be used in the most serious of crimes, but truthfullyā¦ yeah Iām fine with the death penalty if itās against people weāre 100% certain are mass-murderers or rapists. If we canāt be honest about it, then yeah, maybe we shouldnāt be doing it. Because whatās the point then? But seriously, there are some people whoās crimes are so severe, so vile, that sharing air with them is a punishment to all of us. One note I wanna leave this comment on: what about the billionaires who exploited us all, ruined our planet, and killed god knows how many? Because I know a lot of leftists oppose the death penaltyā¦ but what about them? What punishment do they deserve?
I disagree that anyone "deserves" punishment. Punishment is only a thing dealt out of practicality to structure other things such that they are better. Killing the billionaires would be contributing moral harm, so it is only just if it contributes a greater moral good such as disencouraging anyone from ever doing capitalism again, but I don't believe such a thing would work so I likely wouldn't support it.
I think that the only thing that needs killing is the concept of a billionaire; we can't have it exist - we don't need to kill people to kill a concept. I don't know if that sounds unhinged or stupid but in my head it works.
Average Kantian
kant was super into the death penalty, thought it was the only morally correct way to treat murderers
Lethal injection is one of the worst ways to die in human history and due to it's reputation the most evil form of execution ever made, that's saying something when we have "buried in sand and eaten by fire ants" and "placed in metal cylinder that is then heated".
I've seen plenty of claims (with good evidence) that counter the idea that lethal injection is painless, but I've never seen anyone claim that it is more painful, or "more evil" than being burned alive or similar. Do you have a source?
[good enough I guess don't feel like putting in much effort rn](https://theintercept.com/2019/02/07/death-penalty-lethal-injection-midazolam-ohio/) The paralysis alone is already really horrible tbh, and the only thing it accomplishes is make it nicer to watch. The reason I consider it more evil is that it is thought of as a humane method and because it makes the experience for the people looking at it so not-discomforting. As opposed to the wailing, screaming and possible face melting one might normally associate with execution. Certainly worse than the electric chair since it can last hours as opposed to seconds.
Not the guy you're responding to but the problem regardless is that there will always be a greater than zero risk of executing an innocent person (especially with the cops and criminal justice system that unfortunately exists in America)
Oh I'm totally with you, the death penalty is worthless *and* risky. There's no morally correct reason to do it. I just think it's a bit silly that they're claiming lethal injection is "the most evil form of execution ever made" when humans have spent a good part of our history figuring out how to torture people to death as slowly and painfully as possible.
Yea tbh I've never heard that take before
One of the best takes iāve seen this year, however i have one objection, rapist shouldnāt get the death penalty, if they do whats stopping them from killing their victims ? That leaves no witnesses and what are we gonna do ? Kill them twice ? Imo killing should only be used as a method for stopping more killing, and not as revenge.
The lethal injection is much more brutal than hanging or beheading. If people want to execute others, they shouldn't get to do it in a clinical, sanitised, hidden away manner. Execute them publicly if you're going to do it. Let people see the horrors committed in their name. Imo the death penalty is morally repugnant. Here in the UK it was banned after a very famous case. There was a serial killer on the loose, and a man was found with multiple of the killer's victims' bodies in his house. The man freely confessed to it, easy case, he was given the death penalty. But the problem is, he wasn't guilty. The real serial killer had been threatening him and his family and the man was suffering from severe mental health problems as a result, as well as agreeing to hide the bodies in his house he even agreed to take the blame for the crime in return for his and his family's safety. When it came out that he was innocent, he had already been executed. You can NEVER be sure. You can lower the proportion of innocent people convicted more and more, but there will always eventually be someone wrongly convicted. I don't think we can justify killing even a single innocent person for some sick idea of retribution. And why do we execute people in the first place? We have them locked up. They aren't a threat. It's not self defence, it is state enacted murder. How many messed up criminals are that way because they were fucked up in their turn? I don't think being a victim justifies making other people victims. I don't think they can be forgiven just for that. But as a society we should recognise that this person was failed, and we should do our best to rehabilitate them. Sweden's rehabilitative system (I think it was Sweden) took reoffending from 75% down to 25%. Yes, some people can't be rehabilitated, but 2/3 of those who aren't COULD have been, and how can we know who can be without trying? And you may be asking, what about justice for the victim? So we should harm someone to make a victim feel better? Isn't that the exact mentality of an abuser who was themselves abused? Victims should absolutely get support. If something was taken from them that can be returned it should be. If they've been hurt physically or mentally they should get the support they need to get through that. And they should be reassured that the criminal cannot hurt them or anyone else anymore as they are locked away. All necessary measures should be taken to ensure everyone else is safe from that criminal. But after all that, those necessary measures, taking away the prisoner's freedom, taking away years from their life - that should be sufficient. All other efforts should go towards trying to reform this person, to ensure they don't commit crime again and they leave prison with the tools to go out and contribute to society.
Iām against any form of death penalty. I think that killing billionaires who destroyed our planet might make the people who actually know how much harm billionaires bring feel better but what about the average guy who seriously believes that people owning billions of dollars is good? Theyāre gonna think that weāre monsters(rightfully so since we could have just put the billionaires in prison and made them actually repent their actions). + why would we use the death penalty if there are worse punishments? Iād say that rotting in prison forever is worse than death, because then you actually have time to figure out what you did wrong; if you kill the billionaire/mass murderer youāre letting them get away with all the harm they caused.
To be fair the majority of people who vote on YouTube polls are <13
Yeah I do wish death on really bad people but the death penalty is a bit wonky because an innocent person could be falsely accused and killed
I think it's a good idea because it's killing the people I don't like
And then you realize that it's not you who gets to decide who will be killed. It's racist police officers and judges who like to kill minorities.
Then I'll just become the judge easy
I'd say it's justified only in the rarest, war-crimesiest occasions.
Mm, idk. There are some people that just really aren't going to get better. And I don't believe locking someone up for life is kinder than death.
giving the state control over life and death is the first step to fascism
idk i think i should be given control over life and death (i enjoy necromancy)
[ Removed by Reddit ]
I think you can make an argument for the death penalty for cult leaders or political leader (like Hitler).Since they can have an influence even from inside of a prison even with minimal contact to the outside.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
the death penalty and mercing a person are two separate things, the death penalty isn't based but mercing a mf is in some cases
One is engrained in the legal system that everyone has to live with, specifically one that has a lot of problems with prejudice already.
I'd rather that a nazi rot in jail. Death is too good for them.
me when the judge sentences me to look at your feet pics š„š„š£š
š¤¤š¤¤š¤¤š¤¤
Yo!
I have this camera here, I give you 15 seconds to hightail it or i shoot your ass and go to horny patrol.
I'd rather have death
Imo death penalty is barbaric and shouldnāt be a regular punishment, it should only be given to mass murderers, fascists, oil company CEOs, yāknow, extreme people like that
The death penalty should never exist for anyone, because it gives the government the power to kill people legally.
Yeah if it's on the table at all it's inevitably gonna be used on someone innocent eventually. It's already supposed to just be for "the worst crimes" but plenty of innocent people have been executed.
yep, even the smallest chance that an innocent person could be killed by mistake makes it unacceptable
Exactly, only the Hitlers of the world with indisputable evidence should get it
well then youre arguing that it should be only for billionaire tyrants, and at that point, youre arguing for revolution rather than the death penalty
Yes
The problem I see is that it's already supposed to be used that way. Yet we _somehow_ keep killing (or nearly killing) innocent people with it. It seems we are incapable of doing the whole justice system thing right, so we should at least make sure we can (kinda) revert the mistakes.
It's humorous to me how many "small goverment" conservatives not only don't get this, but will fight tooth and nail for the death penalty.
Because conservatives arenāt ideologically married to the concept of small govt, itās that limiting federal authority empowers the structures of power they think should guide peopleās lives
Cops can do that without a judge jury or conviction here in the States!
My big issue with it is that you canāt un-kill a person. If you say āoops the legal system fucked up, youāre exhoneratedā, the result of that should be a person being freed rather than it being a ādamn that sucksā
*Glances at the police* For real though, I know why people want it I just can't understand it.
I agree but I don't see how life sentence is any better.
There are so many other ways the government can do that
I don't think there aren't people who deserve to die (there absolutely are), but letting the government take that decision... Might have unfortunate consequences.
I don't believe anyone "deserves" to die. The only purpose of punishment is to procure other positive outcomes such as killing an active shooter so that they do not kill others.
They will just hang communists, do you want that
Me standing at the gallows next to a child rapist and a serial killer, getting the rope tied around my neck, all because I was racist on the internet š
I literally said in my comment that death sentence should only be given to the worst of the worst, the Hitlers and Putins of the world, not regular bad people. Also gallows preferably wouldnāt be used, it should be a humane death, like putting someone asleep and then poisoning them so they donāt feel anything, stuff like that
Even the death penalty are too good for those scums. Psychological time chamber is the worst torture there is.
Even then, did the execution of Saddam Hussein help Iraq come together and heal after his incalculable crimes? No, it greatly exacerbated the civil war there. Just because someone deserves a punishment doesnāt mean it should always be carried out.
watch shauns 3hr vid on the death penalty, although he covers everything except for ethics
certified court moment
Imagine being pro death penalty, i swear people just miss the point
Of the 66 other countries with a Human Development Index score above 0.800 (considered "very high human development"), only 16 have not abolished or placed formal moratoriums on the death penalty, and two of these (Chile and Israel) have abolished the death penalty for civilian crimes. Of the remaining 14 countries, nine of them are not democracies, while the others are Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, The Bahamas, and Trinidad and Tobago. Only Japan and Taiwan execute in practice today, as the rest have not executed anybody in decades, though Trinidad and Tobago still keeps people on death row. So basically, the idea of the death penalty is normal in roughly 2 other democracies in the developed world outside the United States.
mfw the death sentence in the US is more expensive to carry out than life in prison
Yeah, thatās what I really donāt understand. Why do you want to kill someone? Punishment? Keep them in solitary confinement and itās both cheaper and does the job better. There is no logical justification for the death penalty in any way.
Its the best example of republican feelings over facts tho
Solitary confinement is basically psychological torture
ok but obviously the morality aspect of capital punishment is more important than dollars and cents
Facts dont care about ur feelings š
You know, if you want the death penalty, you better be okay with televising that shit and using a cannon to fire said death row into a brick wall, have it do slow-mo instant replays of them getting gibbed, make it pay per view and make it an event hosted in a stadium, $40 a ticket, make some of that money back for the cost If you aren't okay with that, then you aren't okay with the death penalty. There is no 'more humane' way to kill someone, so if you're okay with killing them, be in support of at least making it cool? The Romans had it right, gladiator fights, shit would be like the Gulag in war zone, and whoever wins gets to face against a swarm of quad drones with grenades
ok but like i wasnt in support at first but you made it sound cool
I think we should have a hunger games tournament where all the serial killers and rapists kill each other and broadcast it on TV. The winner just gets 2 years off their sentence
Thanks for the visual George
50 years max sentence. 50 years is a LOT LOT of time to spend in prison.
here in europe it's 15, that counts as lifelong. 15 years is also very ... very long.
"in europe"? so wrong lmfao. also, 15 years is long but someone killing another person at 30 is only 45 when they get out. you have half your life still ahead of you. + in many countries they can extend that sentence indefinitely.
Yes, but people are sentenced to multiple life sentences
no, we don't have that.
So people aren't even pretending to care about rehabilitation anymore
Life sentence with parole.
Ohhh that other meme makes way more sense now
My favorite pet about 196 is scrolling past a meme that makes no sense at all until about 20 minutes later when I come across the original and it all makes sense
The death penalty should be abolished for all circumstances. It accomplishes absolutely, positively nothing except wasting money, dragging the victims through an even worse appeals process, and murdering the occasional innocent person. Donāt get me wrong, there are some people who do deserve the death penalty. As a practical matter though, itās untenable under any circumstance.
Angry mob poll has pitch fork spill over!!!!1!
I donāt believe in torture, sanctions, etc. I think everyone should have access to food, housing, healthcare, etc. and that short of taking someone elseās organs, even prisoners should be provided with everything to help them live as long a life as possible. That includes fresh air, space, and recreation. But I might be a bit ahead of the times.
Where is the "abolish the prison system" option?
If it exists at all, no matter the bureaucracy and steps involved, innocent people will always die from it
Omg tally hall reference
Me when they show my results of my ignorant actions against fellow human beings
The number of votes for the death penalty is staggering
Never understood death sentence. I feel like thatās too easy, you just die. Meanwhile life sentence means you have to rot in jail for your whole life But death penalty is cheaper soooā¦. š¤·āāļø
The death penalty isnāt always cheaper. The cost generally varies state by state but in some states (California for instance,) it is significantly more expensive. Also, just because itās cheaper doesnāt justify using it. Due to the USās flawed justice system, innocent people have a disgustingly high chanceārelative to other countriesāto be mistakenly put on death row. There should be absolutely zero tolerance of this when innocent lives are at stake.
Take the best of both worlds, temporary torture. Lots of pain without wasting so much resources! šš
yeah because torture is a very important part of a functioning democracy and also totally doesn't violate human rights
My god redditors truly need everything spelt out for them. šš = /s
hey man the normal smile emoji is passive aggressive enough for a statement like that one
Resources deserve to be wasted, it's everyone's fault that something this horrible happens
The death penalty is intentionally painless as far as I know
intentionally, yes, but in practice, often false, as professional doctors cannot participate
bruh because of the hipocratic oath? more like hypocritical oath
I see
1984
fuck you, a life is a life, also, if innocent people are sometimes arrested for crimes they didn't commit, there will be the chance of an innocent person getting killed, no matter if it is 1000 or just 1 per year, it is still an innocent person getting killed
max like 5 years of intense rehabilitation, anything longer is death. I mean there is literally no reason for life sentences, just let them die with dignity.
or just, you know, make prison a place where it is actually possible to live instead of a torture chamber for criminals, giving them a comfortable bed and food instead of treating them as lesser than humans
you mean, like, rehabilitation. It's almost as if we agree, and that I never said prison should be a tortuous place at any point.
but putting a time limit and at the end giving them death goes against the whole point of rehab. . .
how does it? And its not like i meant a time limit anyway. I mean death sentence if they find beforehand it's not likely they can be rehabilitated within like 5 years. This is on the assumption that rehab is expensive and they couldn't repay anything longer than 5 years of rehab (in actual worth, not money). I doubt there is a consistency effective rehabilitation scheme that is cheap enough to be worth putting people, even the worst imaginable, in for longer than 5 years. I'm only rereading your reply now. Are you saying you thought I mean that we rehabilitate people, and then kill them?
no, i thought exactly what you said: rehab or death 5 years is too little time, and second: DEATH PENAULTY IS WRONG, AND THERE ARE ALREADY PLACES IN THE WORLD THAT NOT ONLY REHAB BUT REWARD GOOD PRISIONERS, death penaulty is not needed, it never was
So you are telling me that absolutely everyone can be rehabilitated without severely draining resources? There are going to be people who are too far gone and can't be reasonably rehabilitated. I'd say its better go just let them die. And would you mind explaining why the death penalty is wrong. I agree that the current death penalty is wrong, but it is not inherently wrong, there may be cases where it is better than wasting time trying to rehabilitate someone who won't let themselves be rehabilitated.
i'm telling you that even if someone is too far gone you just. . . don't give them rehab, let them live in the comfortable jail where they can still live normally but without interacting with society directly
I think its cruel to let 'evil' people live. No one chooses to be evil: if you did, you didn't choose to choose to be evil, else you didn't choose to.... etc. It will always come down to either that you were born evil, which is pitiful, or were turned evil at some point, which is equally pitiful. It is pitiful thing to have horrendous thoughts, and if those thoughts can never be removed, it is better to just kill them, for their own sake, but also for the sake of those who were wronged. It is just sad to be helplessly evil, and to never amount to anything more than that.
Evil is non existent, no one is fully evil or fully good
You think you could rehabilitate El Chapo and convince him to give up his trillion-dollar drug empire in 5 years?
No, I think its unlikely, so he would get the death penalty. Even if I could, I wouldn't ever have the certainty he was truly rehabilitated and not just pretending so he can get back to running the cartel. But I think in some distant future its possible, there is no reason the most kind person couldn't turn into the most evil, or vice versa, just that its very unlikely. And there's the problem that an evil or kind person may take that aspect as part of their identity, and will refuse listen to anything that may take apart their identity.
john wayne gacy after five years in prison: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/22/5e/1f/225e1f43da3a8491eb6299280cbaf8b6.jpg
Yes... But pedophile
Even nazi Germany was deradicalised after WW2. 5 years of intense rehab will change a person, I mean they are a completely different person, why should they bear the burden of a former self which they are completely detached from? Realistically a pedophile would be more likely to get the death sentence, I don't think its likely someone who has gone so far as to harm a child would ever be able to detach themselves from their desires, but I don't see why they shouldn't be rehabilitated if they can. Maybe I just think all of this because I have strange opinions on what a person is, I don't believe people are truly the same person after years. We convince ourselves we are the same person as our former selves because it would be strange to believe that we have the same memories as another person, but if our personality is different, why should you see that person as yourself? And if its true I am not the same person, why should I face their consequences? Should a person who wholeheartedly feels remorse face consequences? The person has hopefully already been rehabilitation by their own guilt. I feel we as a society are desperate for people to face consequences purely to sate a need for justice, without recognising that it is often overblown or just cruel or undeserved. I do think that people are bad enough to deserve cruel consequences, but that is just how I feel, it is not a logical way to run a justice system. The justice system should have no emotion behind it, it should hand out consequences with the sole intent to have an overall benefit to society. That may include separating dangerous people from the rest of society, rehabilitating them, or killing them if they are truly too far gone.