8 year old boy murdered because his mom thought he was gay

[Eisen Wolf Reich]

IF they defiantly guilt of such a atrocity, why should we let them appeal their sentence?

Because that's how the system works. Everyone gets the right to appeal their sentences, even those who we all know are 99.99% guilty.

Should they have an unlimited amount of appeals? No. Should there be a time limit on the ability to appeal? Yes.

Give em a year, then off with their head.

[Valgora]

I don't know if it would be cheaper than Option C.

I don't know how much the drugs cost for lethal injection, I just remember that the major (or only) supplier of the chemicals has decided not to sell it to the states to execute people with it.

Not all executions are administered with chemicals - not even a majority. Shocks are much cheaper, and firing squads are obviously far more cheaper.

"All 31 states with the death penalty provide lethal injection as the primary method of execution.

Some states allow other methods than lethal injection, but only as secondary methods to be used merely at the request of the prisoner or if lethal injection is unavailable."
- Wikipedia

[Eisen Wolf Reich]

Not all executions are administered with chemicals - not even a majority. Shocks are much cheaper, and firing squads are obviously far more cheaper.

"All 31 states with the death penalty provide lethal injection as the primary method of execution.

Some states allow other methods than lethal injection, but only as secondary methods to be used merely at the request of the prisoner or if lethal injection is unavailable."
- Wikipedia

He meant globally.

[Thermodolia]

Because that's how the system works. Everyone gets the right to appeal their sentences, even those who we all know are 99.99% guilty.

Should they have an unlimited amount of appeals? No. Should there be a time limit on the ability to appeal? Yes.

Give em a year, then off with their head.

That works. If they can't start the appeal process within a year then they get to be executed

[Methodological Individualism]

[Your] argument issssss?

"Beyond shadow of a doubt" is impossible, which is why the legal threshold is necessarily "reasonable doubt," which in turn leave a lot of uncertainty in place. And that's true even if we assume the jury is unbiased, qualified, and even willing to bother with trying to make a good decision.

(And having served on more than one jury, I'm personally willing to testify that such an assumption is really iffy. Really.)

[Valgora]

"All 31 states with the death penalty provide lethal injection as the primary method of execution.

Some states allow other methods than lethal injection, but only as secondary methods to be used merely at the request of the prisoner or if lethal injection is unavailable."
- Wikipedia

He meant globally.

Only 58 countries retain it in both law and practice.
7 have abolished it, but retain it for exceptional or special circumstances (such as crimes committed in wartime).
28 have abolished it de facto, namely, according to Amnesty International standards, that they have not executed anyone during the last 10 years and are believed to have a policy or established practice of not carrying out executions.
103 have abolished it for all crimes.

[USS Monitor]

Life without parole would prevent these people from reoffending. They aren't the type who are likely to escape and go on a killing spree. Wouldn't pick on a defenseless kid if they were tough like that.

They may not be likely to, but it is theoretically possible. It isn't possible for them to re-commit post execution.

If you're worried about prison breaks, that's possible for someone on death row, but the risk is negligible in either scenario.

[Galloism]

Not if you put a bullet in their skull as soon as they walk out of the court room.

Even that will cost money. Although it would be cheaper than lethal injection.

As far as I know, the cost is really high due to all the legal shit and the time required for a capital case and etc.

Essentially yes - we were executing lots of innocent people and finding out a few months later that they were innocent. A person who's in prison can be let out if they're innocent, but only Mayor Daley can bring back the dead.

The Supreme Court decided that wasn't a good state of affairs and added more appeal options for death penalty cases.

[Trumptonium]

The question you posed was whether the death penalty will be more effective in protecting other children [presumably from this offender]

The logical conclusion is that their elimination is quite obviously going to be more effective than keeping them imprisoned, in the rare case of them being broken out or administratively let out by mistake, or them being let out in the long term to re-offend if the failed to be rehabilitated.

No, the answer to that is there is no significant difference because death or life without parole both reduce the risk to a level that is negligible. The death penalty actually DOESN'T reduce the risk of escape to zero because they could theoretically escape before their execution.

In the long-term it does. What's the point of life without parole anyway?

[Trumptonium]

"All 31 states with the death penalty provide lethal injection as the primary method of execution.

Some states allow other methods than lethal injection, but only as secondary methods to be used merely at the request of the prisoner or if lethal injection is unavailable."
- Wikipedia

He meant globally.

Yes.

I was obviously not talking about the US since it's highly inefficient by the very fact that life w/o parole is cheaper than executions.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

The independent

ABC7



This just disgusts me. Child abusers are scum. To do it beacuse you think he might be gay is another layer of scum.

What these people allegedly did is nothing short of monsterish.

Should they be found guilty, I hope they get life.

But what do you think NSG?

Agree that this is monstrous, disagree with punishment.
They deserve the death penalty.
And I hope that the brother and sister gets the help they need for the undeserved guilt and trauma they will likely feel.
I don't hate much, child abusers and molesters though, I especially hate with a passion.

Death penalty is very tempting in these kinds of cases. Very tempting indeed.

However, I maintain the belief that outside a state of war, the state should never have the power to kill someone.

[Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft]

Agree that this is monstrous, disagree with punishment.
They deserve the death penalty.
And I hope that the brother and sister gets the help they need for the undeserved guilt and trauma they will likely feel.
I don't hate much, child abusers and molesters though, I especially hate with a passion.

Death penalty is very tempting in these kinds of cases. Very tempting indeed.

However, I maintain the belief that outside a state of war, the state should never have the power to kill someone.

As no justice system is 100% infallible, the death penalty mathematically will kill innocent suspects. Which is why I disagree with the death penalty almost completely (in very rare cases i.e. hypothetical execution of Kim Jong-un, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi or other similarly fucked up people, I would condone it)

[Telconi]

They may not be likely to, but it is theoretically possible. It isn't possible for them to re-commit post execution.

If you're worried about prison breaks, that's possible for someone on death row, but the risk is negligible in either scenario.

What is or isn't negligible is subjective.

Secondly I support the option of death more on the idea of humane punishment rather than on some small percentage of re-commit on prison breaks.

[Methodological Individualism]

However, I maintain the belief that outside a state of war, the state should never have the power to kill someone.

I'm personally willing to entertain the argument that there exist crimes so terribly heinous that the question of whether capital punishment actually deters crime becomes irrelevant, to the extent that people inclined to such heinous crimes are so deranged that they likely cannot be deterred by anything short of death anyway.

Although it's likely that these sorts of situations probably involve significant breakdowns in civil society (to wit, war) anyway. Mass murder of civilians, Holocausts, and similar crimes against humanity are the obvious candidates.

I have to admit, though, that it's not actually difficult to see violent crimes against children rising to the same level, regardless of my opinions expressed so far.

[Senkaku]

However, I maintain the belief that outside a state of war, the state should never have the power to kill someone.

I'm personally willing to entertain the argument that there exist crimes so terribly heinous that the question of whether capital punishment actually deters crime becomes irrelevant, to the extent that people inclined to such heinous crimes are so deranged that they likely cannot be deterred by anything short of death anyway.

^even if it doesn't deter them, it reassures the rest of us that the harshest possible justice has been handed out in return for their crimes. And in this case, the victim of said crimes is not around to give us, the outraged public, his feelings on the matter, so I say whack 'em.

[Menassa]

It seems like he was murdered because his parents are barbaric, not because they thought he was gay...

[Liriena]

It's really hard for me to put into words every single thing that breaks me about this. Nobody should die that young. Nobody should die like that. Nobody should die for that. A defenseless child shouldn't have his life cut short by violence, least of all from his family, and he should not spend the last moments of his life being brutalized without any thought or remorse by those who should have loved him. He deserved better.

I don't support the death penalty, but when it's a goddamn child? A little boy tortured and killed for the "crime" of appearing gay? I won't blame anyone who wishes this mom and her boyfriend die horribly.

I'm so bloody tired of homophobia and machismo, and watching innocent lives be destroyed in their name...

[Rostavykhan]

Hopefully, the fuckers get just as bad, or worse, punishment. At least, I'd think that to be justice.

You want to know the really sickening thing? There's probably people out there who think all this was acceptable and the state has no right to intervene.

Until you tell them the woman and her boyfriend are Muslim. Then they suddenly give a shit about LGBT rights and call it an outrage that proves Trump Is Right.

I'm giving you a Grand Prix trophy, cause that was the fastest jump into Trump-blaming I've seen all week.

[Telconi]

It's really hard for me to put into words every single thing that breaks me about this. Nobody should die that young. Nobody should die like that. Nobody should die for that. A defenseless child shouldn't have his life cut short by violence, least of all from his family, and he should not spend the last moments of his life being brutalized without any thought or remorse by those who should have loved him. He deserved better.

I don't support the death penalty, but when it's a goddamn child? A little boy tortured and killed for the "crime" of appearing gay? I won't blame anyone who wishes this mom and her boyfriend die horribly.

I'm so bloody tired of homophobia and machismo, and watching innocent lives be destroyed in their name...

Well said. This adequately put my feelings into words in ways I couldn't have. My only point of issue is that while I find execution to be generally an unfitting punishment, I do believe in this circumstance it is warranted.

[Methodological Individualism]

I'm personally willing to entertain the argument that there exist crimes so terribly heinous that the question of whether capital punishment actually deters crime becomes irrelevant, to the extent that people inclined to such heinous crimes are so deranged that they likely cannot be deterred by anything short of death anyway.

^even if it doesn't deter them, it reassures the rest of us that the harshest possible justice has been handed out in return for their crimes. And in this case, the victim of said crimes is not around to give us, the outraged public, his feelings on the matter, so I say whack 'em.

Just to clarify my post -- my concern is not to deliver "the harshest possible justice." My concern is simply that there probably exists crimes so heinous that their commission is probably evidence that the committer is beyond rehabilitation. Justice should seek rehabilitation at every possible opportunity, and the "harshness" of the means used should be reasonably proportional to the crime committed.

It's entirely likely that a petty shoplifter can be easily rehabilitated, probably because the crime is due to some economic distress rather than some inherent depravity. By contrast, the perpetrator of a mass extermination of an ethnic group demonstrates, I think it can be argued, a level of depravity that is likely permanently incompatible with peaceful civil society.

Even so, the execution of the latter should have less to do with satisfying the blood lust of an outraged public, and more to do with the simple defense of civil society from someone who has quite arguably demonstrated a full willingness to destroy said society by any means or cost.

But, in defending ourselves from an almost incomprehensible insanity, we should take care to not become incomprehensibly insane ourselves. Thus, extensive and rightly expensive protective institutions -- legal rights (presumption of innocence, burden of proof on the accuser), strong rules of evidence, jury trials, appeals processes, etc.

[Methodological Individualism]

It seems like he was murdered because his parents are barbaric, not because they thought he was gay...

These two categories are not mutually exclusive.

[Salus Maior]

Child abuse is always evil. And this is certainly no exception.

Disgusting.

[Vassenor]

Hopefully, the fuckers get just as bad, or worse, punishment. At least, I'd think that to be justice.

Until you tell them the woman and her boyfriend are Muslim. Then they suddenly give a shit about LGBT rights and call it an outrage that proves Trump Is Right.

I'm giving you a Grand Prix trophy, cause that was the fastest jump into Trump-blaming I've seen all week.

I don't see any actual Trump-blaming there.

[Rostavykhan]

Hopefully, the fuckers get just as bad, or worse, punishment. At least, I'd think that to be justice.



I'm giving you a Grand Prix trophy, cause that was the fastest jump into Trump-blaming I've seen all week.

I don't see any actual Trump-blaming there.

Corrected.

Just prodding at Trump supporters and edgy "Muslim Drumpf ecks-dee" muppetry.

[The of Japan]

What happened to Christians Don't Kill Gays Anymore?

Christians shouldn’t murder PERIOD by the Bible (I am currently reading the Bible)