I’m sorry you feel that way. Maybe when you get more life experience, you’ll realize that most scumbags will only avoid engaging in heinous acts if the deterrent for doing so is appropriate.
Let’s say we do decide to torture murderers. Who is going to torture them? Are we going to pay for these people to have therapy (because they’re really going to need it)? How would you feel if you found out your next-door neighbour tortures people for a living? What do we do when we find out, years later, that we’ve been torturing an innocent person?
I think you need a little more life experience so you can realize that things aren’t as simple as you seem to think they are.
It doesn’t, though. There’s no evidence that the death penalty serves any sort of deterrent. It isn’t a punitive measure, it’s vengeance. If you’re ok with vengeance I respect your opinion though I disagree, but we can’t pretend it’s anything but vengeance.
I believe the use of the death penalty in severe cases isn't driven by vengeance; it's more about preventing the individual from causing harm to others in the future. It's important to recognize that not all criminals can be successfully rehabilitated, such as psychopaths or serial killers.
However, if the death penalty were to exist, I believe it should be carried out by the person who pronounces the verdict personally. This would ensure that such a grave decision is not made lightly.
Could you not prevent them from causing additional harm by not killing them? What if you’re wrong? There’s plenty of reason to leave them alive, but only one real reason to kill them, and that reason is vengeance.
Are you familiar with how the psychopathic mind functions? They lack empathy, and I don't mean it in a pejorative sense, no, I mean it literally.
Psychopaths are hard to reason with due to their lack of aforementioned empathy, manipulative nature, impulsivity, shallow emotions, and absence of remorse.
people don’t commit these crimes with the expectation that they’re going to be caught. I don’t know how serious you are but I find it a little disturbing to condone torture
What do you think would be a more effective deterrent?
Sorry reality disturbs you. Let me know when you think of something better. It looks like these people weren’t deterred by the possible consequences of their actions.
I was thinking of letting the victim’s close ones do what they want to the demons for one day, but I’m not sure what that would do with their psyche afterwards.
E: The psyche of those doing the retribution.
I wouldn’t. It’s far more punishing and even that is far too little to throw them in a cell and lose the key. Let them sit there for endless years until they die. Done.
Life imprisonment is cheaper (in the US) for the taxpayer than execution. Morally, I think the death penalty does not have a leg to stand on. Even in the most egregious cases, who truly has the right to end a life? Can any justice system be 100% accurate? If there is even a slim chance that an innocent could be murdered by the state, the state should not murder. It’s valid to have a visceral reaction to horrific crimes like this, but to advocate for murdering even of a guilty party just doesn’t mesh with at least my ethics
Locking people in a cage as a consequence of their misdeeds is different than the state killing to prove killing people is wrong and immoral.
Take a minute to actually educate yourself about how incredibly badly we handle the death penalty. I have met too many men who were 100% innocent if their crime who got put on death row because of incompetence by investigators or prosecution to support it.
That visceral reaction is exactly why victims or their families can’t have input. Of course you’d want them to be punished, of course you’d want it to be cruel and unusual.
While I agree the State shouldn’t kill, if someone decided not to spend those millions of dollars and instead took these bastards behind the jail and put a $0.15 bullet in each of their skulls I wouldn’t be angry.
Add a dude eating chips, another dude eating a cupcake, pad it out with 11 hours of nothing at all happening and you’ve got a hit on your hands somehow
You say that now, but what about death penalties in Sudan? Iran? China? Are western executions more moral? What is the purpose? Revenge? Deterrence? The death penalty in the real world disproportionally affects minority and disadvantaged populations. It is not a deterrent to crime, and there is truly no humane way to end a person’s life. What of the executioner’s psyche? What of the innocent family of the condemned? There are so many terrible consequences.
As tired and trite as it is, “an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind” applies and is true. The death penalty only continues the cycle of violence.
edit: I missed your point 😅 I still can’t condone violence in any capacity
You know, in political theory the entire conceptual basis of the state is that the state is the has the sole monopoly on violence. That’s it, that’s what the state is. It is the sole purveyor of social norms and order by using violence as a tool of enforcement.
It isn’t clear to me if execution is actually cheaper or not. And the 8th amendment effectively bans the simple methods of killing. It needs to be sterile and mostly painless for most people.
Would I like to make an exception for pedophiles, where we castrate them, physically and chemically? Yes. But we’ve agreed as a society that we won’t dole out cruel punishments as a cost for ensuring our government stays in check. I generally prefer lifetime imprisonment without parole for two reasons.
There were a lot of executions where, when we went back to look at them with newer technology for DNA evidence, we realized the accused was actually innocent, and the criminal got away. You can imagine there was a racial component as well which meant death sentences were assigned more often to non white people than white people. It would be hubris for us to think that our systems are perfect now. Another technological development in the future could exonerate people we think are definitely guilty. I don’t want any more innocent people to die where we realize their innocence too late.
Being locked up for life sounds like a fate worse than depth, especially if it’s solitary confinement. Let them rot and go and insane.
If life-imprisonment is a fate worse than death (most prisoners disagree, that’s why it’s common to plea a death sentence down to a life-sentence), then doesn’t this mean that it is preferable to erroneously execute innocent people rather than give them life-imprisonment?
Your second point really severely undermines your first argument.
Only if additional evidence emerges. Innocent people are still going to face life imprisonment, and the argument is that it’s better to execute people than life imprisonment.
Even then this is extremely subjective, many people who have never been imprisoned or faced imminent death think that they would prefer execution, and somehow generalise this feeling to all people when in reality very few people choose execution when given the option.
I prefer a 3m steel cube, welded shut, with a poop hole, a human-sized gerbil spout for water, and a hole for gruel to be pumped in twice a day. No clothes, bedding, or even a bowl for the gruel.
I love how this community is extremely against death penalty to the point of brigading posts here, but as soon as the skin pigmentation goes even slightly darker than tan, those people are nowhere to be seen.
Not for nothing, but in the US, the pedophiles that end up in the prison system are very likely to experience hell on earth as the other inmates will certainly not be a fan of theirs. It’s like some criminal pecking order. I have no idea if that’s a thing outside the US, but maybe…
This is almost certainly a myth. Prisons are full of rapists and pedophiles, nobody cares. The only actual code of ethics criminal organisations have is no snitching or defrauding because it hurts them, that’s all they care about.
If a claim is made that anecdotal evidence is incorrect then presenting anecdotal evidence does not refute that claim. Even worse your sources basically say that it’s not really a big deal, because it isn’t. Criminals really don’t care what you have done so long as you don’t hurt them.
Yes, and you have presented a giant pile of conjecture, followed it up with a bunch of judgment, and then made a major effort to let us know how much insight you have, without actually providing any insight. Way to go, Jasory!
Even a bit of personal experience goes further than a pile of conjecture spewed from an internet “know it all.”
On what basis do you determine that my claims are not sourced? You have no information that my claims are less credible than those of the interview subjects. They are both unsupported and anecdotal at the worst; however you can actually find information on prison socialisation in academic papers and they largely support my claims. Swindlers are treated worse than sex offenders because this idea of moral code among criminals doesn’t really exist, they only care if you harm them directly.
“Made a major effort to know how much insight you have”
Where? Do you even understand what this sentence you wrote even means? Until this reply, I never claimed having a source of insight or argued for why my statement is correct. I merely made a statement that the common notion of “honor among thieves” doesn’t really exist, and personal stories aren’t sufficient to prove that it does. I do have personal experience with this, so technically my claims have just as much basis as the random people interviewed. However this is irrelevant because there are better sources than personal stories.
Additionally if you think that anything in this discussion is a “major effort”, you have abysmally low standards. Writing one or two paragraphs is highly trivial.
You made a profound statement, almost of fact. “This is almost certainly a myth”. This is your argument statement, it’s your conjecture and your major effort to show the audience your insight.
Stop back peddling.
You presented no sources of any kind, and then you started turning things into a research paper where I needed to submit my work in MLA format for the professor. I gave you people’s experiences; you replied with a mouth full of shit (conjecture) with no basis of any kind other than your claimed philosophical knowledge.
No, sir, you seem to have a very, very high opinion of your intelligence. You are also very insecure with this opinion. Just one glance at your social history shows how hard you try to let everyone know how much higher your intellect is than theirs. It’s problematic when you spout unfounded conjecture as fact; it’s worse when you believe the bullshit coming out of your shit box.
I don’t give two fucks how many papers on thieves you have written, or what your criteria are for the conversation because the first two sentences out of your mouth are pure elitist garbage. Go back to your hole of correcting the internet Jasory, I have no time for your bullshit.
In what fuckin universe does that even make sense. How dull does the mind have to be to justify this? I couldn’t chop an arm off of someone I hate, let alone a kid. Let alone all the other insert word to describe this horror.
I’m not too familiar with India’s politics, but what does the BJP have to do with this incident? And how will changing parties solve these issues - is there any political party in India that’s actually good and not corrupt? I heard corruption is pretty common across all of the government sector, regardless of the party in power?
Yep, both sides-ing is a terrible argument, and it becomes clear when you see the difference in these things. Capitalism is terrible, capitalism boosted by bigotry is a whole another evil
And to make things worse, the religious conflicts are also political conflicts, because of the Muslim-majority parts of India eventually splitting into Pakistan and later Bangladesh. As a result, nationalist Indians want all Muslims to be deported to either of those places, as they consider them fundamentally incompatible with the national faith and culture, which for them are one thing and the same.
Everything. They incite violence using the fragility of our enviornment. They fund terrorists like RSS and VHP to supress minorities and make the environment more patriarchal according to hindu scriptures. some parties are corrupt but BJP is the most corrupt and it is trying to increase it more because more corruption = more hindu extreamism = more votes.
Lol, read that headline again and tell me you’re concerned about the cost. The death penalty literally costs more than life imprisonment in the United States. What would be your lower cost alternative?
I don’t believe in an eye for an eye, ok sometimes I do, but here it should apply. No taking high ground on ppl like these. The poor little girl deserves this type of justice against these foul creatures.
Was she an untouchable? Most of the time in these reports where someone has committed some unspeakable atrocity against another in India it’s a higher caste victimizing an untouchable.
I also understand that if you here specific shit always coming from a specific place that it’s a smoke and fire situation.
Add to that all too many personal experiences where my wife and I had issues with Indians (from India) and yeah, it has led me to believe that something is seriously wrong with their culture. It has nothing to do with race or racism, they have a beautiful culture, but a number of parts of their culture are seriously fucked up and must be changed
I’m earnestly asking any Indian folks why I’ve seen too many articles like this coming out of India. Why is it so unsafe for women in that country? Sexism? Regressive beliefs around sex?
It’s important to remember what a big place it is. A billion people. A lot can happen. And it may not be some essential quality of the entire country. I mean hell you can’t judge all of America by Mississippi.
I don’t know about this kind of maiming women but there are definitely moments when I see Europeans, for example, ask “why is America so fucked up?” after they learn about something that went down in Missouri.
Whatever country you are from, think about the most backwards/rural/remote location that has people with backwards and regressive views.
Consider that India likely has 5 to 10x the population of rural folks in small villages that have midevil views compared to your country.
Add in long standing cultural misogynist views that is so pervasive it fully permeates all aspects of government and life and you quickly get to a point where abuse and domestic violence is tolerated.
As per usual, it’s not like the entire country shares these views. It’s just the the number of backwards views in India is numerically huge because of its population.
However, if you want to be part of civil society, you have to do things right. These asswipes deserve a judge and jury too and will then spend probably the rest of their lives in jail.
Sitting in a shitty room and not being able to go outside is torture enough for most. Remember how we all went a bit wonky in the head during lockdown? Like that, but for a lifetime.
What if you get the wrong person? Yes the perpetrator deserves terrible things, but in order to find and get the right people, we need to go about it in a systematic way. Locking people in jail rather than killing them has the benefit of allowing us to free them should they be exonerated and someone else caught.
It’s not about what’s deserved, it’s about what will lead to the best outcome. Retribution doesn’t necessarily solve problems.
So in other words, you don’t want s civil society, you want anarchy with vendettas and vigilantes because there is no way that could go wrong. There is no way that anyone would abuse that, and no way that anyone innocent would become victim of your system, right? RIGHT?
A civil society doesn’t let women be gang raped, cooked alive then chopped into pieces.
I’m suggesting that maybe they need gangs of women doling out the same kind of attacks on the men that roam around attacking women. It might make men think twice about attacks.
This is not a good thing to do but in the face of a society that seems to care very little about justice for women, it doesn’t really seem crazy.
Well, not entirely. A civil society will try to educate people to not commit criminal acts. It will punish criminal acts. It can’t, however, stop criminal acts with 100% accuracy. No system can. Neither can your “ideas”
What you propose though is just have groups of women go out and straight up murder random innocent men. That doesn’t sound great, it sounds terrible. It has nothing to do with justice, it’s purely about revenge.
Now I’ll happily agree that Indian societal culture is fucked up badly. Castes and treatment of women are just two of the issues and anytime gang rapes come up, you know it’s India or Hindus and that really shows it’s a cultural issue. My wife and I also have multiple personal experiences with Indians (Muslims too, btw) where it’s always them causing any issues.
So having said all that: I think the solution lies in restructuring their cultures. Their boys need to be taught what is right and wrong and right now they’re being taught the wrong thing. I know from personal experience that in a number of countries Muslim boys are taught that western women are whores and that you can do pretty much anything you like to them, as long as you make sure you don’t get caught. I imagine boys in indea having a somewhat similar teaching. THAT is what need to change, but seeing as widespread as it is, good luck with that.
It reminds me of this travel show video where two blonde girls had to go to some village in India and when they arrived there were hundreds of men waiting for them, pushing them, taking forced selfies with them, until they ran off back in the train and left. It was fucking creepy.
Change the culture, don’t assault random innocent men.
I agree with what you are saying but I didn’t ever say to attack random innocent men. I said groups of women should attack the men that attack and rape lone women. It’s not like these type of men only ever attack one woman, they are likely repeat offenders known to the community but possibly protected by money, class or connections and should be dealt with illegally as there is no legal justice that can deal with them.
You do understand that we ha r a system set up for this already in every country? It’s called the justice system? They are supposed to have rules for this. If that isn’t working then adjust that system.
Having vigilantes roam the street is a recipe for disaster that guaranteed will end with a lot of innocent victims because lynchings always end up with innocent victims
I’ve seen the female mallard with half of her feathers removed, floating face down in the water dead, all while the males continue to gang rape her for hours.
Maybe we should compare people like this to ducks.
Oh no no no. She was very much alive when they started.
I heard the horror from my bedroom window. See, I had a creek in my back yard, and across from that creek was the only stretch of land that wasn’t a mountain. It wasn’t a big stretch either.
I looked out the window and I seen her running in absolute horror, “QUACK! QUACK! QUACK!” They got her three at a time, sometimes more. They started with the feathers on the back of her neck. She was running around with a bloodied, naked, neck. Then they held her down and started ripping feathers from everywhere. She ran for the water and tried to swim away. One by one they held her head under water while another climbed on her back holding her by the skin of her bleeding neck. Feathers flew. She’d get her head up to quack a quack of terror, and they’d dip her back in.
It wasn’t long until she was floating with her face in the water. The rape went on for hours after that.
I’ve now read up on this case and the film that you named. Was it available online? I looked and couldn’t find it. The trailer alone was fucking harrowing.
Yeah, I read that and searched for “[title] bbc” and only found stuff referencing it. Maybe it’s better that I know about it without being directly exposed anyway. So horrifying.
Add comment