Nah. We just need to stop doing lethal injections and use a gun or a guillotine or however many other guaranteed instant death methods humans have come up with. Lethal injection is silly. It’s just for the people that show up to watch.
What value is there in keeping people who torture others to death in cages for decades before they die naturally while we foot the bill?
For one why should the state have the power over life and death especially when mistakes are made? For another you know the death penalty cases cost more due to challenges and stuff like that, so even though “cost” shouldn’t matter even if it did your case isn’t supported.
For one why should the state have the power over life and death especially when mistakes are made?
Then who decides? Seems like you’re saying the alternative is for the state to decide to keep them locked in a cage for decades before they wither and die while we pay for it.
Note that I said I only support it when the evidence undeniably proves they committed the crime.
For another you know the death penalty cases cost more due to challenges and stuff like that,
Then maybe we should change the process. Again, I said I only support it if the evidence is immutable. So why allow any delays in a situation like that? Should be quick and inexpensive beyond the initial trial.
There are very good reasons to be against the death penalty and torture in the abstract, but that doesn’t mean we have to be sympathetic to this particular monster’s suffering.
And that justifies torture surely?
Nah. We just need to stop doing lethal injections and use a gun or a guillotine or however many other guaranteed instant death methods humans have come up with. Lethal injection is silly. It’s just for the people that show up to watch.
What value is there in keeping people who torture others to death in cages for decades before they die naturally while we foot the bill?
For one why should the state have the power over life and death especially when mistakes are made? For another you know the death penalty cases cost more due to challenges and stuff like that, so even though “cost” shouldn’t matter even if it did your case isn’t supported.
Then who decides? Seems like you’re saying the alternative is for the state to decide to keep them locked in a cage for decades before they wither and die while we pay for it.
Note that I said I only support it when the evidence undeniably proves they committed the crime.
Then maybe we should change the process. Again, I said I only support it if the evidence is immutable. So why allow any delays in a situation like that? Should be quick and inexpensive beyond the initial trial.
Make it easier for the state to execute people with large amounts of wrongful convictions everywhere. The evidence is never “immutable”.
There are very good reasons to be against the death penalty and torture in the abstract, but that doesn’t mean we have to be sympathetic to this particular monster’s suffering.