• proudblond@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    4 months ago

    I would not say there is specifically an upside to keeping a serial killer alive, but there are many downsides to the death penalty both ethically and in practice, not the least of which is the chance that you would execute an innocent person. For those of us who are anti-death penalty, that is usually where we’re coming from.

    • yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I’m against the death penalty, and I know the best argument against it, something nobody in this thread has even approximately articulated.

      Currently, as far as I know, there is only one strong argument against the death penalty, and it has to do with moral proscriptions against treating the death of a person as a spectacle, which I notice nobody mentioned. I’m guessing this is because most people have absolutely no fucking idea why they’re against the death penalty.

      • proudblond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        I don’t want someone to kill me; therefore I believe it is also not okay for me to kill someone else. It’s just the golden rule. I am not a student of ethics or philosophy but it seems pretty straightforward to me.

        • yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          You’re misapplying the golden rule, which is about how you would want to be treated in similar circumstances.

          In the event that I were guilty of causing great harm to innocent people, then I should be killed. Not in revenge, but as a matter of mercy and justice. For in that irremediable case, my life would no longer be worth living.

          This is the golden rule in action.

      • Burstar@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        it isn’t a deterrent,

        It is cheaper to let them rot in prison for life,

        nobody wants to make the drugs involved for the ‘humane way’ so it is really difficult to obtain enough where it is used,

        it is fundamentally inhumane to kill someone that knows it’s coming (mental torture),

        risk of executing an innocent, and as already stated

        it is hypocritical to kill someone for killing.

        • yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          it is fundamentally inhumane to kill someone that knows it’s coming (mental torture)

          That killing serial killers causes them harm isn’t a particularly compelling point, since we disagree over whether harming them is, in fact, good.

          risk of executing an innocent

          This is a good point and one I would explore further. However, it leaves open exceptions where the evidence is overwhelming.

          it is hypocritical to kill someone for killing

          Killing isn’t always bad. Killing innocent creatures is bad. Killing serial killers is tantamount to putting down rabid animals.

      • aidan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Currently, as far as I know, there is only one strong argument against the death penalty, and it has to do with moral proscriptions against treating the death of a person as a spectacle, which I notice nobody mentioned.

        Nah I think not killing innocent people is a pretty strong argument, death being a spectacle doesn’t really matter to me- someone killing someone is much worse than the part where they post it on LiveLeak