• GladiusB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    I really don’t know. I think for certain types of crimes, I’m ok with it. Like rapists of young children. They have zero contribution to society and are unable to be repaired. I don’t know if this crime fits that threshold. 47 billion is ridiculous.

    • DABDA@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      The possibility/certainty of intentional or accidental false convictions doesn’t affect your acceptance of the state meting out permanent punishment?

      • GladiusB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        If it’s marginal of course. I’m talking about the real psychopaths that either admit it or are caught on camera with witnesses.

        • DABDA@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Consider what your thresholds are for what constitutes witnesses and admissions of guilt. For example, confessing to crimes that weren’t actually performed by them, do you honor the claim anyway?

          And does a group of police witnessing a suspect or conversely a group of the suspect’s friends witnessing a police officer do something heinous count?

          Remember any mistakes cannot be remedied.

          • GladiusB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I am. There are some truly sick people out there. I’m talking about some one off that is in a bad situation without any evidence.

            But people like Dahmer, Hitler, Osama Bin Laden, I’m ok with those going away as a message to society. I don’t think it’s unnecessarily a bad thing.

            • DABDA@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              I’m not going to try to convince you otherwise but I just want you to recognize that your position is that you’re ok with “bad” people being killed as a form of punishment and mine is that ensuring that label is always appropriately applied is an impossibility.

              I don’t like the thought of terrible people getting to continue to live if they’ve done irreparable harm to others, but I’m also not ok with saying that we totally need to burn THAT WITCH because Goody Constance totally witnessed them communing with the devil.

              Osama/Hitler getting killed in military action - fine. An abused child/person killing their attacker - look the other way. Giving Edward Snowden lethal injection because he totally deserves it for endangering Americans - not acceptable.

              • GladiusB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                Yea. It’s more like if this person can’t be studied or has no use here except to haunt the living, sure. Get rid of them. Some of them want that. Some psychos know how bad they are to society.

                But then you have a lot to weigh in on. You said it shouldn’t exist at all. Which for the most part I do agree with. But there are some that I am ok with going away.

                Hitler was not killed in action. He killed himself. People like Dr. Death or the rest of his inner cronies can be executed as well.