Nine months after Kenneth Smith’s botched lethal injection, state attorney general has asked for approval to kill him with nitrogen

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
53 points

Execution is cruel, regardless of method.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I’m against the death penalty but if I ever murder a load of people then I’d like to be able able to freely choose death by nitrogen over a life in prison

permalink
report
parent
reply
-33 points

You know what else is cruel? People killing other people. And the former continuing to live despite their cruelty.

The only rub against execution to me is the risk of executing the innocent. But that is not the concern here. There is no dispute this guy is guilty.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Capital punishment is government sanctioned killing. Outside of war, the government should not have the power to kill anyone.

Let them rot in prison. It’s cheaper anyway.

Abolish capital punishment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-12 points

Except them rotting in prison is cruel and unusual punishment. No, they get shelter, 3 meals a day, healthcare when they need it, and even recreation.

And I’m anti-war. It’s ok for innocents to fight and kill each other, but not to kill murderers?

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

The only rub against execution to me is the risk of executing the innocent.

Right, so why is that not a total disqualifier then? Even if the risk is fleeting small, there is no taking it back. If it came out later on, dead is dead. Combining that with the fact that executions are obv a psychological cluster fuck for everyone who deals with it, especially the one executed, and the fact that it takes a lot of resources every trial because it’s such an unusually cruel punishment, the arguments for it are dwindling.

Also

You know what else is cruel? People killing other people.

Right but we’re not voting someone in office who can eliminate all homicides in the United States. Things are different for execution.

We could also talk about how this “well tough shit” opinion always fucks over positive and healthy change, but that’s probably the least impactful argument for the folks who still bank on executions as some sort of greater good.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

Read the rest of what I said. There is no doubt here. I do think the death penalty should require a higher standard of guilt. But some people, through their actions, simply have forfeited their right to live.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

You know what else is cruel? People killing other people.

Then why aren’t you advocating for executing those that execute killers? After all, they kill people. But I’m going to assume that you think those killers are okay.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

Executions are generally set up so no one person is responsible for the person’s death. And they generally volunteer.

How are they different from a war veteran that killed somebody during war?

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Doesn’t ‘people killing other people’ include the state killing people? I don’t see how vengeance for a murder solves anything.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

No

permalink
report
parent
reply
-50 points

Opinion 👆.

Fact: it’s necessary to remove certain people who are prone to violence and incapable of rehabilitation. If you have such a problem with execution, then volunteer your time, money, and home to accommodate a violent psychopath with you forever.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

Fact: when we sentence people to death we get it wrong one time in three

Fact: executing someone is more expensive than keeping them in prison for life

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Wait why is it more expensive?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-20 points

Ah, but it doesn’t have to be. There’s lots of inexpensive, humane ways to dispatch a human. How methods like electrocution and lethal cocktail injection were decided on is difficult to understand. Nitrogen, though, is probably the nicest way it could be done. Relatively cheap too, and with zero chance of failure.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

Shitty take. There are more than two options here, and suggesting otherwise is using an either-or fallacy as a bad way to try to win an argument.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Opinion 👆.

Fact: punishments can be reversed, if the punished stays alive. Any percentage of unjust executions is irredeemable. Also, there is a lot of evidence that abolishing the death penalty either does not affect the crime rate, or it has a positive effect (see link below).

More opinion: executions have no place in a society that highly values human rights because killing people is the exact opposite of humane. If you think prisoners are monsters and you could never end up in there, watch a documentary about it. If you see what some ppl went through, you know how easy anyone can end up there.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/ACT50/015/2008/en/

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
*

That’s as silly a comment as “if you think Native Americans were wronged, give your house to one,” something else I’ve heard people say. Societal wrongs are not solved by individuals.

Somehow all the countries that don’t allow capital punishment find ways to deal with extremely violent people and don’t have murderers running amok.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

Somehow all the countries that don’t allow capital punishment find ways to deal with extremely violent people and don’t have murderers running amok.

Russia be like…

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Kinda funny that you label the comment you replied to as opinion and then proceeded to dress your own (shitty) opinion up as fact.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Also opinion 👆

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 451K

    Comments