Does method of execution, crime committed or overall cost matter to you?

  • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Yes, I believe it’s nearly always immoral, and the exception is public figures directly involved in crimes against humanity.

    If you have to have a trial to figure out if you got the right person, that’s too much doubt. It’s just Nuremberg, Saddam, the radio guy from Rwanda, and folks like them. Everything else regardless of how monstrous the state should only kill if they are absolutely incapable of keeping that person from taking more lives.

    Also governments should be held accountable when one prisoner kills another in a situation that could have been predicted. And yes this includes pedos being stabbed in prison.

    • Chippys_mittens@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I don’t personally see a difference in a serial rapist and a public figure like you stated. I think both should be axed, assuming dead to rights evidence of crime.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Because for non public figures we keep thinking we have dead to rights evidence of crimes and executing people who turn out innocent

        • Chippys_mittens@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          I recognize the unfortunate fact that innocent people have been and will continue to be killed unjustly. I’m saying drawing a moral line between one would need to extend to the other. If it’s wrong, its wrong. The idea that you’d pick and choose who deserves it just means you’re in favor of it.