739
Kenneth Smith ‘struggled for life’ for 22 minutes in Alabama nitrogen gas execution: Updates
(www.independent.co.uk)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2024
739 points (93.6% liked)
News
23311 readers
1076 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
The only people I'm ok with killing are the ones we have undeniable poof for. Like the Uvalde school shooter. They have footage of him in the school with the gun and know he killed the kids. In my book he's OK to execute. if there's even a shred of doubt in anyone's case then execution should be off the books period.
The problem with that logic is that every criminal conviction is supposed to have "undeniable proof!"
No it's not. In the context of the justice system in question, reasonable doubt is a MUCH lower bar than undeniable proof.
It isn't supposed to be, though.
Edit: hey downvoter, what part of Blackstone's Ratio do you not fucking understand?
A reasonable doubt is less strict than undeniable proof. If I go outside and see that the lawn and road is wet then I can beyond a reasonable doubt ascertain that it has rained, but that's not undeniable proof. If I go outside and get rained on and measure that rainfall in a scientific way then that is undeniable proof. Blackstone's ratio is irrelevant; too many people are wrongfully imprisoned and executed on dubious evidence. We seem to fucking agree about that, so calm down.
I downvote comments that are obtuse or don't actually contribute to the conversation and I don't see anything wrong with that.
I can't see the hair that you're splitting here. If proof is deniable, then it's not beyond reasonable doubt.
There is a room with a candy bar in it, a biometric scan to enter, and a camera outside the only door.
You scan your retina to go in, you come out a few moments later, and after 5 minutes a security guard goes in, finds the room intact, and also sees the candy bar gone.
By deductive reasoning, you took the candy bar beyond a reasonable doubt.
There is a remote possibility that after you left and before the guard arrived, a mission impossible crew came in from the ceiling and took the candy bar specifically to frame you. Or perhaps the entire candy bar quantum tunnelled or was teleported by aliens in an event that denies conventional understanding.
The guy you replied to is making this point. If it is in any way theoretically possible that guilt is in question, no execution. Reasonable doubt as a standard assumes the natural order of the universe and logic are preserved such that inferences are possible.
But that also seems like a foundation that "undeniable proof" would rest on. If the only way for a proof to be denied is for the "natural order of the universe and logic" to not apply, then there's simply no such thing.
Focus on the Mission Impossible crew stealing the candy bar:
It’s simply preposterous. It’s not known to be impossible (like an alien candy bar abduction), though.
See what you mean though!
I don't support the execution of the Uvalde shooter.
What does killing him accomplish?
Justice? Not really.
Restitution? Not at all.
Vengeance? Not really.
Deterrence? Not really.
Closure for the families of the victims? I suppose.
I don't know about this case, but some families of victims oppose the death penalty, even in the case of the murder of their children.
Some reasons for this view could be religious beliefs, or the view that death is the easy way out, or the deterrence value of being able to point at a person in jail, or the potential for the person to do some good in the world.
These people would object to closure for them being used as justification for killing their child's murderer.
It's not fair to victim families to make them choose life or death for a murderer. It would be a decision they'd have to live with forever. We can't do that to them.
My opinion is that capital punishment should only be used where a person guilty of a 'capital crime' can't be reliably imprisoned.
Ie I'm not sure Iraqis were wrong to execute Saddam Hussein. I don't think it would be wrong for countries that struggle with corruption in their penal system to execute cartel leaders (that have been convicted of 'capital crimes'). War crimes, insurrection leaders, that sort of thing.
Well said. Great point about Saddam.
One thing and one thing only: saves tax payer money long term.
Nope. The math has been done on this many times, and death sentence is more expensive than life without parole. And that's according to the State's own numbers.