Good thing we (the US) lost the war, or this lady would probably have her own team of lobbyists running their country.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 130 points 2 years ago (84 children)

The death penalty is always wrong.
Murder is not a punishment and once you've stripped her of her ill-got gains there is no longer any reason to kill her.

  • source
  • hideshow 84 child comments
  • [–] 52 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    I hear you but if I’m honest, and tomorrow America announced it was going to execute every billionaire, I’m not going to put up too much of a protest.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Take the money, sure. Then they're no longer billionaires and there's no need to kill them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 59 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    In other words, you don’t murder disarmed prisoners of war.

    During class war they are the enemy and deserve what comes to them. If taken alive and their weapon of war removed, they don’t need to be dealt with the same way.

    Once they are no longer a threat you can work on rehabilitation and restitution.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    First off, I agree with you.

    But...second...I struggle with the rehabilitation bit. Some people cannot be rehabilitated. It is a hard truth I have learned, coupled with pain and regret, many times in my life. I'm just curious what you think the course of action should be at that point?

    I'm not suggesting death/murder, but I do struggle with the idea that if they're miserable, and the people around them are made miserable, and the people trying to help them are made miserable...what do you do?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    You do everything you can for them (whilst making sure they're not a danger to other people), give the caretakers / wardens plenty of time off, and you give them the option for assisted suicide. In my ideal world, everyone would have the option for assisted suicide though

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    Some people cannot be rehabilitated.

    You can't know that. You only have evidence for people's inability to've been rehabilitated so far.

    I’m just curious what you think the course of action should be at that point?

    Not murder.

    if they’re miserable, and the people around them are made miserable, and the people trying to help them are made miserable…what do you do?

    ...drugs?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    The way these people affect so many lives negatively with their fraud is much worse than a person committing murder.

    The literal misery they cause to so many people for their own benefit without a fucking iota of shame and their sociopathic behavior is enough to consider eliminating them from society.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    The way these people affect so many lives negatively with their fraud is much worse than a person committing murder.

    Irrespective how is two bad things better than one bad thing? I would think fewer bad things would be net better.

    The literal misery they cause to so many people for their own benefit without a fucking iota of shame and their sociopathic behavior is enough to consider eliminating them from society.

    You speak of "sociopathic behavior" while advocating state murder. 🤨

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    I know. It sounds fucked. But these people are a cancer on society. There's very little that can be done to reform these people. And the problem is that capitalism rewards this kind of behaviour.

    These people currently are ruling the world. If they aren't the head of some large company, there the head of a government. Because of their large wealth, they have a huge influence on the policies. They're basically dictating the laws that are governing them. It's like playing Monopoly with your own made up rules.

    You can't stop those people any other way. The French understood this. When the price of food was out of reach, heads started to roll. Literally. Nowadays the people can't be violent anymore. Heck, the mere act of peacefully protesting is met with police violence and oppression. How the fuck are we supposed to get the message across when those people have their own militia protecting them and their interests?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (32 children)

    I disagree. I don't subscribe to a world view where every life is sacred. Society has a right to protect itself from persons that will always endanger other people and that includes killing them. However, it has been quite clear that we cannot guarantee that no innocent people are killed. And that's why I'm OK with the death penalty only in principle, not in practice.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 32 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (31 children)

    persons that will always endanger other people and that includes killing them.

    You cannot know that, and if you have the ability to strap someone down and end their life, you have no need to do so since you clearly have complete control over their person.

    I’m OK with the death penalty only in principle

    You shouldn't be. States qua arbiters of justice should not intentionally kill people under their control.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (11 children)

    This is a discussion about personal morals. Some people think it's OK to execute some criminals, others are completely opposed to that idea. There is no objective right or wrong here.

    For you your arguments might be compelling, but they don't convince me. I can have complete control over someone and still decide to kill them because I don't want to bother with locking them up, for example. And who says a society should not kill? That's not even an argument, just an opinion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • load more comments (11 replies)
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (35 children)

    While I agree in principle I tend to think there are still unforgivable crimes and irredeemable people out there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 35 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 2 years ago (34 children)

    While I agree in principle I tend to think there are still unforgivable crimes and irredeemable people out there.

    Then you don't agree.

    I wasn't aware crime was about forgiveness.
    I thought in-so-far as societies implemented systems of justice, their purpose was restitution and rehabilitiation.

    No one gains anything from a person—irrespective their prior actions—being murdered and we all lose a bit of our soul each time a state execution is allowed to take place.

    I really expected better from Vietnam, whose "quarantine at gunpoint" public health policies I heartily endorse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 34 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (9 children)
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    then you don't agree

    Allow me some cognitive dissonance because I really don't know what society should do about psychopaths, predators, or cases like those execs who put melamine into milk to spoof the protein metrics, leading to the horrible deaths of a large number of babies.

    Holding them indefinitely is a useless drain on the state, killing them leads to the inevitability of innocent people dying.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    Allow me some cognitive dissonance

    Not if you use it to advocate state murder I won't.

    killing them leads to the inevitability of innocent people dying.

    Innocent people will always have the ability to die, no matter how many people your state murders.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (22 replies)