this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2024
555 points (98.3% liked)

News

23387 readers
3465 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Prosecutors will seek the death penalty for the white supremacist who killed 10 Black people at a Buffalo supermarket.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] derf82@lemmy.world 36 points 10 months ago (3 children)

The only issue with the death penalty is the potential to execute the innocent. There is no danger of that here. I don’t want to share the planet with this racist prick.

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago (2 children)

That’s not “the only issue,” you fucking ghoul. It’s a barbaric practice and has no place in a civilized society.

[–] derf82@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I don’t think it’s barbaric at all. Hell, if anything, making people care for this asshole for 50+ years is barbaric. There is no rehabilitation for this guy. There is no way he becomes a productive member of society.

[–] TheDarksteel94@sopuli.xyz 1 points 10 months ago (3 children)

If even long-term KKK members can be rehabilitated then so can this kid whose brain hasn't even fully developed.

[–] derf82@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

So what, you think you can just let a mass murderer walk the streets again because he convinced someone he’s rehabilitated?

Even those long term KKK members didn’t kill people.

[–] TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

What about the families of these 10 victims? They deserve justice more than this kid deserves freedom. I'm not saying he can't be rehabilitated. I am saying that it is very injust to let this kid to ever have a free life after he ended the lives of 10 people.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

What makes you think the families will all agree with you that this is what the killer deserves?

[–] TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I mean I'm not 100 percent that all of them would want it, but it's what the families want in the majority of these cases. Anytime you see a murderer come up for appeal you usually see family or friends of the victim in interviews saying how they don't want that to happen.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

How often do you actually see what victims' families say when murderers are put on parole? For me it's occasionally when the news reports on it. I don't think we can say what the majority want.

[–] TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago

A lot actually. I watch a lot of true crime documentaries. It happens the vast majority of the time. There are a few cases of mostly Christian people forgiving their families murderer, but most do not ever forgive someone for something like that.

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I want to believe that, the goal should be rehabilitation somehow. That said, at this moment in time when we don’t have good rehabilitation implementations, I find this turn of events acceptable based on the crime committed.

[–] TheDarksteel94@sopuli.xyz 2 points 10 months ago

True, in most countries the prison system is crap. I just don't like when people paint other people as monsters, no matter what they've done. Rehabilitation to me doesn't necessarily equal them being free ever again. Just means that they've changed as a person and truly regret their actions.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The other issue is that it quite frequently costs exponentially more to administer the death penalty due to years of appeals. I'm not sure how that would work in this case, since as you said, it's apparent that the defendant is guilty.

[–] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

His appeals will be focused on procedure, rather than facts. Pretty much the go-to defense strategy when a suspect is caught red handed. If you can’t argue the facts of the case, try to get the facts thrown out on technicality (like maybe the police mishandled evidence so it’s not admissible anymore,) or try to minimize the person’s crime as much as possible. Try to get the sentence reduced, try to downplay the convict’s actions, emphasize how much they have changed, etc…

Basically just damage control. Accept that you aren’t going to come out of it unscathed, so just work to mitigate the damage instead of trying to avoid it altogether.

[–] derf82@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I mean, given the choice of paying for him to have 3 squares and a place to sleep, I’d rather pay a little more to be rid of him.

[–] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (2 children)

It's not "a little more" to prosecute a death penalty case. It's a lot more depending on the state. I strongly recommend reading the link but here are some snippets from it.

A 2003 legislative audit in Kansas found that the estimated cost of a death penalty case was 70% more than the cost of a comparable non-death penalty case. Death penalty case costs were counted through to execution (median cost $1.26 million). Non-death penalty case costs were counted through to the end of incarceration (median cost $740,000).

In Tennessee, death penalty trials cost an average of 48% more than the average cost of trials in which prosecutors seek life imprisonment.

In Maryland death penalty cases cost 3 times more than non-death penalty cases, or $3 million for a single case.

In California the current system costs $137 million per year; it would cost $11.5 million for a system without the death penalty.

Now consider that there is a very strong agreement among experts that the death penalty does not serve as a deterrent to other criminals.

That means that the extra expense of pursuing the death penalty has no effect on increasing public safety since the convicted criminal, whether they are executed or are spending the rest of their life in prison, is not a risk to the public. Finally, all that extra money spent on death penalty trials is money that could be better spent on measures that really would improve public safety such as reducing poverty or improving education.

[–] Sagifurius@lemm.ee 0 points 10 months ago

Why do you people present this is as an answer to the previous statement? EVERYONE knows this at this point, it doesn't change thee previous statement in the slightest. It's like when people smugly respond "that's not how free speech works"....no, not according to everyone who prefers to limit it, it ain't. You're rebutting someone's principles with regulations made by people don't care for that specific philosophy and saying more about yourself than you think.

[–] Sagifurius@lemm.ee -4 points 10 months ago

Which is why you execute them immediately, not 20-30 years later. I don't want to hear about innocent people in jail that long, I don't even want to hear about guilty people in jail very long. Just kill em and move on regardless, it's really less cruel.