this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2024
228 points (98.7% liked)

News

22876 readers
3960 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.


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
 

The state of Missouri on Tuesday executed Brian Dorsey for the 2006 murders of his cousin, Sarah Bonnie, and her husband, Benjamin Bonnie, after an effort to have his life spared failed in recent days.

Dorsey’s time of death was recorded as 6:11 p.m, the Missouri Department of Corrections said in a news release. The method of execution was lethal injection, Karen Pojmann, a spokesperson for the department, said at a news conference, adding it “went smoothly, no problems.”

The execution of Dorsey, 52, occurred hours after the US Supreme Court declined to intervene and about a day after Missouri’s Republican governor denied clemency, rejecting the inmate’s petition – backed by more than 70 correctional officers and others – for a commutation of his sentence to life in prison.

Dorsey and his attorneys cited his remorse, his rehabilitation while behind bars and his representation at trial by attorneys who allegedly had a “financial conflict of interest” as reasons he should not be put to death. But those arguments were insufficient to convince Gov. Mike Parson, who said in a statement carrying out Dorsey’s sentence “would deliver justice and provide closure.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

What about them? They're not intentionally killed.

[–] sepulcher@lemmy.ca -4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

So? They still lose their lives.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You really don't understand the difference between an innocent person potentially dying in prison and an innocent person definitely dying in prison?

[–] sepulcher@lemmy.ca -4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Of course I do. The end result is still the same for those who die in prison.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Again- potential vs. definite. Why is potential just as bad as definite to you?

There's the potential you will get hit by a car every time you walk down the street. Isn't that potential better than someone intentionally driving into you?

[–] sepulcher@lemmy.ca -4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Because either way an innocent person is losing their life because of the state.

I just wanted you to admit that it's acceptable to imprison potentially innocent people for life but it's not okay to execute them, which you did.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I said no such thing. Do not lie.

Of course it is not acceptable to imprison potentially innocent people for life. That's why you give them many chances to appeal. Do you think that I believe people should not be given chances to appeal or something?

And, again, they only have the potential of being in prison for life. If their appeals have been exhausted but new evidence arises, special circumstances can be made.

People with the death penalty who have exhausted all of their appeals get killed.

Also, there is no restitution given to innocent people who were killed. Innocent people who were imprisoned and get let free get restitution.

Now, please answer me:

There’s the potential you will get hit by a car every time you walk down the street. Isn’t that potential better than someone intentionally driving into you?

[–] sepulcher@lemmy.ca -4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Of course it is not acceptable to imprison potentially innocent people for life.

But that's what happens when we imprison people for life. Inevitably, someone innocent is going to end up there. Just like with the death penalty, right?

You're typing an essay because you don't realize how you've succumbed to doublethink.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 2 points 5 months ago

You're ignoring that the state should rectify unacceptable situations. With wrongful imprisonment, the state can rectify the situation and compensate the innocent. With the death penalty, this is never possible. And even if such a rectification is not done, at least the prisoner was still able to live somewhat of a life.

This makes life imprisonment infintely more acceptable that the death penalty. There's no doublethink in admitting there are different gradations of unacceptable.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I guess that's why Anders Breivik wasn't imprisoned for life.

Now please answer my question.

[–] Roflmasterbigpimp@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Just checked his Account. 2 Days old, lots of negative Comment-ratio. Most likely a Troll.