I wouldnât support the death penalty under any circumstances, largely because it is hard to draw the line between what is a capital offence and what is custodial.
Once that death penalty is on the books, your only a shift right from what constitutes getting the chair expanding.
Put it this way. Would you want Priti Patel or Suella Braverman to have the death penalty in their back pocket.
Iâd rather start from the basis that the state does not have the right to terminate a citizens life. Any circumstances. Full stop.
but itâs okay for Jeffrey Dahmer to butcher his victims and stick them in his freezer, right?
If a dog viciously attacks you, we put that dog down. Itâs a threat.
But if a young man breaks into your home, rapes then murders your wife and daughter⌠just put them in prison for 20 years? Society pays ÂŁ1,000,000 (average cost 50k/yr) to house that murderer for that term, then say at age of 37 heâs released into society⌠youâre okay with this? What if he moves into your neighborhood?
The death penalty can only be imposed on defendants convicted of capital offenses â such as murder, treason, genocide, or the killing or kidnapping of a Congressman, the President, or a Supreme Court justice. Unlike other punishments, a jury must decide whether to impose the death penalty. Many states have stopped using the death penalty, though the federal government may still use it. The Supreme Court has found that imposing the death penalty on those under age 18 at the time of the crime or the intellectually disabled to be âcruel and unusual punishmentâ under the United States Constitution.
Sorry, I didnât realise you were talking about America. I thought you were talking about sentence in the UK and how it would work hypothetically - thatâs what you post suggested to me.
America, which of course never executes any innocent people.
In the UK juryâs have no influence of sentencing.
In this world there are few/vanishingly low number of serial killers. Even that number is likely inflated by definition. The vast majority of individuals that kill multiple times are a product of a failure of society and are an indictment of those societyâs shortcomingsâŚ
As brutal as it sounds, itâs irrelevant what I think of it.
Presumably, as a result of this crime Iâm in an emotionally compromised condition and too unstable to make any kind of objective judgement about what kind of justice this man would receive. If Iâm calling for the death penalty at this point, the only purpose of that would be revenge, and no matter how heinous the crime the state cannot facilitate justice on that basis. It has to be what the state considers to be the appropriate sentence for the crime.
Iâm pretty sure the crime as youâve set it out would carry the maximum permitted sentence.
As for moving to my neighbourhood, I would expect there would be measures to prevent that, conditions of parole, that kind of thing.
there hasnât been a death sentence in the UK since the 60âs. I donât know how the sentencing worked there when it came to capital punishment, my apologies for inferring that.
I wouldnât want him killed. Jesus Christ. I just think anyone who voted for him in 2019 is lying to us and themselves if they claim they didnât know what kind of man he was.