How do you feel about the death penalty?

[Stoner710]

here my position, death penalty you should be used in three cases all you have to prove without a shadow of a doubt the person commit the crime
1st degree murder. we have DNA evidence phone record storm record we can find out motive, where the body was buried, the time day to the exact measure, most of the time we catch the guilty they should be executed

2nd rape, rapist are evil people they need to die, its definitely uncomfortable form women, but once your raped you need to get sperm samples out of you vagina so they have DNA evidence so we can fry the guy. i not saying that shit is easy, but the pussy is a self cleaning organism we need DNA samples to get the person that raped you.

3rd child molest station (and were not talking about a 20 year old guy sleeping with a 17 year old) Child molesters to be fried I don't know how you prove any of that stuff but I say we kill all child molesters

[nightdrot]

The purpose of the law in general and the penal system in particular is first and foremost, to protect society, second to punish the guilty and third and least, to reform the criminal if possible. In that order.

Capital punishment, generally speaking, does not seem to afford those benefits. First, it is the surety of punishment, not its severity, that is a deterrent to crime. If an individual is sure that they will be punished, they will likely not act. If that individual believes that they might get away with it, they will likely run the risk.

So in that sense, capital punishment fails its first and most important test. It does not deter and therefore it does not protect the society. Throw in that it applies only in cases of premeditation - crimes of passion are not premeditated - and the range of those whom capital punishment applies becomes proportionately smaller.

Secondly, it is axiomatic that we shape our laws and then our laws shape us. In that context, capital punishment reflects - and is a result of - the society's treatment of life as a means rather than an end. In this it is the parallel of the abortion argument. The planted axiom of liberal abortion laws is that life has no value save that which each individual attributes to it, therefore the law has no proper standing to afford it protection.

Capital punishment is a case of the society deciding that the value of life is contingent rather than absolute. That action decides life's value rather than life's inherent worth. When the society places vengeance over any inherent value to life, it will apt in its larger context to see more of the former and value the latter less and less.

To be sure, in the matter of capital punishment that is at the margins and dealing with decidedly unsympathetic individuals. Arguably the case can be made that "killing the killer" suggests that society places a much higher value on life. However, on balance, the inspiration of capital punishment is vengeance and not justice and thus both the value of life and the value of justice is undermined.

Beyond that, humans are imperfect and there are issues related to failings of the legal system. In the question of justice, the accidental execution of the innocent is not an injustice that can be undone. Indeed, it is what suggests that vengeance - and not justice - is what inspires laws that condone capital punishment.

In short, capital punishment harms society with too few countervailing benefits.

[Stoner710]

Except it’s not parallel to the abortion argument and unborn child has not committed a crime the baby hasn’t murders anyone the murder by taking a life they got caught for there crimes, Also how does it benefit society to have our taxpayers pay for these guys to eat when a bullet cost 50 cents and it’s quick an painless. Killing the killer is justice in most society and eyes for and eyes a tooth for a tooth, If one purposefully take someone’s life in cold blood that person has lost the right to live. As yes humans are imperfect but again tell me how it benefit anyone but the killer to have them stay alive? There was a guy who was recently executed and the liberals Moran is death, this asshole raped and murdered his 2 year old daughter her mother came out and witnessed him doing his. 1 how do you reform someone like that. 2 if you can’t reform someone like that which I believe you can’t what benefits is it to society to pay for him to continue to live. (We pay taxes we pay for him to live)

[nightdrot]

So if it is "eye for an eye," what is the difference between vengeance and justice? Make the distinction? My point is that if the purpose of capital punishment is to deter, then it fails. If it is justice, then what justice is it that relativizes the value of human life. After all, if an action can forfeit the definition of humanity, than it does not take much to define the mere act of conception as an aggression and thus expendable. A society that make an arbitrary distinction as to when life should be protected is not apt to draw the line at capital punishment. Indeed, it will take unto itself the definition of life's value - and thus you will get abortion and capital punishment. Both of which, you will note, command popular support at the moment. The parallel is not exact, but society is not apt to draw such fine line distinctions. Indeed, once the value of life becomes contingent, it will in due course become relative. Thus you will get capital punishment and abortion - or about what we now have.

[Stoner710]

Yes and eyes for an eyes is justice in case of murder, you plan to commit a murders of a innocent person you deserve to die, The act of conception is not an act of aggression by the logic voluntarily having sex is a an act of aggression because you can cause that conception. Which is on its face ridiculous. Also it’s not an arbitrary standard, The standard is you don’t get to kill someone who has not commit a horrible crime and unborn child has not taken anyone’s life, the abortion doctor has taken the babies life so logically execute abortion doctors

[nightdrot]

Your problem is that you assume that if you write a generic law you will produce narrow results. You will not. Your fine line distinctions will be lost in the tumult of a culture that relativizes the value of life. You may "deserve to die." However, the instant that the notion that there is a point at which the value of life can be determined to be forfeit, do not be surprised if society begins to draw other lines to suit its convenience. You are right, it does not start as an arbitrary standard. My point is that it will become one. Once a society grants to itself the power to determine the value of life at any given point, it is not apt to relinquish that judgment. It will, rather, define it according to its' convenience.

[Stoner710]

The only ones who makes the standard arbitrary typically are authoritarian leftist, Right libertarians tend to hold the same standard we’ve had for hundreds of years you murder someone is cold blood die especially if you plotted to do it, it’s part of the nonaggression principles you kill someone you have committed an act of aggression. An unborn baby has not committed an act of aggression if that was the case you would have to argue to be intellectually consistent that sucks itself is an active heard in aggression because it can cause conception another act of aggression. It’s a very week argument because then anything from a man simply saying hi to a women is an act of aggression and vice a versa When you hold the standard you murdered someone your get executed it can’t be twisted because it’s a very simple standard this is why morality matters

[nightdrot]

Well, at this point you are just name calling. The point is that we shape the law and the law then shapes us. If you admit as a principle of law that life may be forfeit. At some point that principle will become infused in the larger society. Which is indeed what has happened. Capital punishment is the law, and abortion is the law. The underlying commonality being that man is mere instrument of society and his value is determined by the shifting standards of the hour. Eventually the value of life becomes not an absolute, but one determined, as I say, by the conveniences of the hour. Indeed, your point about a man saying "Hi" to a woman makes my point. That is where we find ourselves. Now you need only ask how we got here.

[Stoner710]

We got here because largely due to Marxist policies and the rejection of morality has a hole which is why we need to get back to our old moral standard. Abortion should be illegal and Capital punishment should be legal

[nightdrot]

Okay, well at this point you have replaced mere sloganeering for actual analysis. Please illustrate how Marx brought us to this juncture based on his words and arguments.

[Stoner710]

Marxism started the socialist movement in many countries Marx as actually against the death penalty (ironically the results of Marxist philosophy is a lot of people get put to death mainly for being dissenters). It evolved to the point where they believe we shouldn’t put to death murders because they have a right to live, but we can put to death unborn children because it’s fallowing the patriarchy. feminism itself wouldn’t exist without Marx

[nightdrot]

Actually, the Marxist states - and I speak here with the first hand knowledge of my family some of whom lived in East Germany - were the most prolific in capital punishment. Leaving that aside, please stipulate what tenets of Marxist philosophy demonstrates your argument.

[Stoner710]

The tenets of Marxism is the idea that the ruling class (The bourgeoisie). Are taking advantage of the working class and have to be destroyed in order to achieve a more utopian very of life, idea like all land is communal and workers own there products. He was also against the death penalty I don’t know where it actually says that but I’ve been taught that. Now of course what happens is not what Marx came up with because your always going to have dissenters. I was talking to one of my friends last night about this he always stubbles on what you do with dissenters. The only option is to kill them or in prison for life it’s not a good situation. I think Marx was trying to come up with a good society but he gravely underestimated human greed

[nightdrot]

Nope. Your reading is too superficial. Marx at his most fundamental said that man is nothing more than an outgrowth of the means of production. He is a product of the autonomous dialectic of History - with a capital "H" - and that his value his determined by class and other economic forces. Put another way, man has no inherent value and that such value as he is given is the product of forces outside of himself. Thus does China make extensive use of capital punishment - see the Uighars - and thus the "one child policy." The value of man being determined by his economic worth. This, in turn, being a subjective judgment determined not by man's inherent value. Rather by the value of the autonomous forces that created him. Thus, as I say, do you get capital punishment and forced abortions. Man's value being subjective and thus relative to circumstance and not inherently worthwhile.

[nightdrot]

The point being that by your definition, the vale of life is relative. It is forfeit by the action of the living and thus is subjective. The funny part being then that your stand on capital punishment is reflective, however unintentionally, of the very Marxism you deplore.

[DeathJack]

I don’t really know how I feel about the death penalty. Here’s why:


The kind of people that it should be used on generally, have no remorse or empathy, which generally means they are sociopathic, psychopathic or narcissistic. Now, in the first two cases, a lot of the time they won’t fear death, therefore is kind of a useless deterrent, in the last case they do fear death. But lack the emotional range to be able to consider the death penalty as a deterrent prior to committing their crime.


Secondly, unless a person was caught in the act, by more than one person. “A shadow of a doubt” will always exist, the issue with the death penalty is that people are judgmental, people make conclusions based on information given to them, which is either doctored or presented in a manner to which helps which ever side is providing the case. This has happened thousands of times in history and still happens to this day.


Putting someone in an electric chair, for a crime they were “guilty” for but didn’t commit, is a very different kind of screw up. Especially if he’s proven innocent after the fact.


The death penalty may have been an effective deterrent in the past, but killing people for the sake of killing them, when you’re going to lock them up for the rest of their lives anyway, doesn’t make any sense.


Apologise for any spelling mistakes it’s 6am and I’m just awake.

[Stoner710]

All good it was 1 am when I wrote this. I mostly agree with you, There was a case where a a guy raped his 2 year old daughter and killed her by smashing her head agains a pick up truck. His wife was the only witness to the crime. Of course DNA evidence was found and the guy was executed at the end of last year. There was also a case I think about 9 years ago Anders Behring Breivik lit fire to a building and went over to a children’s birthday party on an island when the police was distracted he killed 69 people. The guy should be executed, Norway doesn’t have the death penalty, He did get the maximum sentence of 25 years the man was 33 at the time he meaning he’s going to get out at 58 when in reality he should have gotten the death penalty, So I will say there definitely cases where the murders should be executed swift bullet to the back of the head I say.

[Anonymous]

I’m not sure how I feel about the death penalty... I don’t like killing people no matter how awful they are and I know a lot of people will hate that I feel that way. I personally like the idea of locking them up in prison without the luxury of a tv or anything like that and instead they should be getting help, like therapy because I believe people need that but then being a victim, not of rape but of molestation when I was only a toddler and then in my early teens, for long I hated them and wanted them dead. As I’ve grow up I don’t wish death or anything on them, just that they get the help they need for whatever mental issues they have because clearly there’s something wrong there.


I by all means don’t think a person should get away with the awful things they do but I don’t think death is it. Let them suffer in prison where they can hopefully also get help. They’ll live with the fact that they’ve harmed someone, for the rest of their life and hopefully after getting help they they realise what they did was awful.


It is life and you’re going to get shit people who do these awful things, you can’t kill them all.
I don’t promote murder...

[Stoner710]

i think most of that os fair, i don't condone torture but i think a lot or criminal who commit this types of crimes can be reformed also i don't see why people (you and me buy tax dollars should be keeping these jerks alive a quick bullet to the baxk of the head does the trick, hell put them to death by quick fast acting poison and allow then to die with a movie they enjoy, but i think they should die not matter what, they have lost the right to live by there actions

[Dragonpurple]

Why get help for someone if they should never be let out? Then again, people with life sentences still get out on parole. The ACLU has made is to prisoners get some luxuries. My question has always been, if we take guns away from criminals who use them, how come we let rapists keep their weapon?

[Stoner710]

@Dragonpurple exactly might as well get rid of them especially if they have a 300 year sentence

[normalice]

Death penalty would be fine if our justice system was flawless. But it's not. If even one innocent person is killed by the state, then everyone who voted for it is a murderer and qualifies for getting shot in the face, as well. Or, put another way, if you advocate for killing the innocent, even by accident, you are no longer innocent and everyone is operating within the confines of reason to force you to be consistent by advocating for your death as well.

[Stoner710]

No system is ever going to be flawless, as long as humans are running it, Most of the times the police get the right guy. I don't know about you but I don’t want my tax dollars going to feed people who draw up a plan to kill someone and carried it out, There was a case recently where a guy was executed for crimes of raping his two-year-old daughter and that smashing her head against a pick up truck, His wife caught him in the act, I don't know about you but I’d rather not pay for this guy to have a moldy hunk of bread with a glass of water that guy doesn’t deserve it in my opinion. I get what your saying about not wanting to mess up and kill innocent people hence why I think we should only use the death penalty for beyond a shadow of a doubt as the standard for execution even if there is a 1% chance the person is innocent then you don’t execute. I don't know if you remember that guy in Norway who decided to light a building on fire to distract the police so that he could go over at shoot up an birthday party’s what was happening on a small island park he killed about 30-40 kids that guy because a max sentence in Norway is 25 years will get out people like that should have a quick bullet to the back of the head. Not 25 year of living off the tax payers dime and then getting back out again. So I’d like to see it use in cases where there is no doubt the person is guilty

[normalice]

But you're drawing up a plan to kill people right now. "Most of the time" sounds acceptable to idealists until it's them who is falsely accused.

[Stoner710]

Of course 1 innocent man dying is a tragedy letting 100 murderers eat from my tax dollar it is also a bigger tragedy. Tell me we know who the Parkland shooter is don’t you think he deserves the death penalty he went in and he murdered 17 students, why should my tax dollars go to feeding a guy who has killed 17 people in a mass school shootings why should any of our tax dollars go to pay for this guy to eat or even have water to drink the best solution put a bullet in the back of his skull, but no I gotta pay for him to continue to live a life he doesn’t deserve, where is the justice in that?

[normalice]

If you think letting 100 possibly innocent people is worse then murdering one of them, then you have at least admitted your moral priorites. You value money over life, rendering you a starved animal of precisely the same variety that you argue needs to be put down.

[Stoner710]

Ok sure if rather pay for a 10,00 people who are guilty and say oh shit if 100 people get killed I’m for that it’d still 1%

[normalice]

Yeah, don't worry. Unless it is you personally getting killed for a crime you are innocent of, it would never enter my mind that you would think there's a problem with that.

[Stoner710]

Of course it’s sad when an innocent person gets killed, That why I’m saying beyond a shadow of a doubt. Do you want your tax dollars going to feed the parkland shooter? I know I don’t do you want your tax dollars feeding a guy who raped and killed his 2 year old daughter? I know I don’t

[normalice]

Beyond a shadow of a doubt was basically my first sentence. The problem is there is no such thing, as I said I alluded to in my second sentence, is that it's easier to get it wrong than to get it right. I know a prison psychologist in northern California. While he's not a lawyer or anyone official, he estimates a third of his patients only come to him because they are legitimately innocent and can't deal with having their lives stolen because the prison industry wanted more money. And that's the other side of this coin. You say you don't want you taxes to pay to keep murderes alive. They don't. Maybe a tiny fraction of a percentage of what you pay is actually spent on that. The rest all goes to the offshore account of the guy that owns the prison. If you want to revisit the death penalty, even if the justice system were flawless, you're going to have to go through the prison owners. The capitalist, enterprising prison owners that worked hard to get in a position to leech money off the misery of others. Unless you're suggesting we eliminate for profit prisons, but that's socialism so you would never..

[Stoner710]

Actually state run prisons isn’t socialism socialism is Government ownership I have the means of production, When queen Elisabeth spent time in the town of London under queen Mary the prison she was in was owned by the government as a matter of act prison have been run by the government since the birth of civilization, So now days if the government were to take over the prisons it wouldn’t be socialist, If they were to take over Amazon that would be socialism, or if the government was to take over healthcare that also would be socialism, government run prisons woukd be normal, also I don’t see why private people own prison that’s always been stupid to me. Also the parkland shooter is a great example of beyond a shadow of a doubt, The guys was caught with the guns in his bag he was walking away from the scene of the crime, you can’t tell me that guy doesn’t deserve to be executed.

[normalice]

I didn't sit on the jury and don't trust the media, so I can't tell you anything about the parkland shooter. Also, it's cherry picking to decide which government functions qualify as socialism based on bloodlust.

[Stoner710]

We cherry pick all the time, Government does have a say is something but not all thing. If you have something that has been around for the past 5000 years state run prisons for example that wouldn’t be considered socialism. Welfare would be considered a form of socialism. Parkland shooter guy was 18 years old made threatening comments on social media the cops had come to his house about 20 to 30 times because of previous threats to People, the guy lost him mom and dad (so some sympathy there). But he decided to go in and kill 17 people and try to run away with the evidence on his back and was caught red-handed. We know he didn’t it and really should be executed for it. That’s basically what happened

[normalice]

Setting your definition based on what's been around a long time is arbitrary and still cherry picking. You just made a proxy for cherry picking criteria instead of services. So is that what the media told you about the parkland shooter, or were you on the jury?

[Stoner710]

Actually I watched the trail. He did get 17 counts of murder because he was 17 they didn’t give him the death penalty

[normalice]

The broadcast the trial? Huh. In any case I didn't see it and so can't agree or disagree with you. Do I think he's going to be anything useful in life? No. But frankly there are a lot in the Shapiro crowd I'd make an identical assessment of, so forcing people to earn their existence is unwise. Is he likely to be redeemable? Of course not. But the simple fact, quite apart from being unsure of anyone's guilt in general, is at this point killing him doesn't protect anyone. Violence should only be done in defense. Acting out of anger is just as primitive as what he did. Acting out of "because it's cheaper" is even less human-like. Indeed, that's precisely the sort of logic mass murderers use. If I didn't know you were in a really thick bubble I'd caution you about being on the path to becoming precisely the sort of psycho you beloeve everyone should want dead.

[Stoner710]

I guess that’s fair, At this point. It would be pointless at this point beyond still don’t like the fact he gets to live when those he slaughtered don’t get to live, but again in very special circumstance I’m still for the death penalty, Let me put it this way if you I am committed a murder that’s too graphic for a horror movie to come up with you probably should be executed at that point especially if there’s video evidence and fingerprint analysis and all that stuff they actually do a fairly good job nowadays getting the right guy 70s and 80s and even 90s was is a different story, can we at least castrate the child molesters?

[normalice]

Even so you are asking someone to be an executioner, not for defense, but for revenge. Or expedience. Or it doesn't really matter why because it's not defense. They aren't backed into a corner. You are asking - nay demanding - that they stop whatever plans they had for their own life and become a murderer, instead. As for castration, similar sort of thing - you're not saving anyone by doing it but instead giving the doctor who has to perform the surgery some possible nightmares, especially if it turns out they were innocent. It's just for revenge. And that's fine if you want to be that kind of person, but be honest about it. Put it to a vote for what it is. This far right effort to mislabel everything just to get their agenda passed is really irritating.

[Stoner710]

Your right, but jail is also a form of revenge if they’re never going to get out. For the parkland shooter death would probably be preferable he’s probably going to be raped in prison and when he’s told old to be a bitch he will be killed by a fellow prisoner, but still what’s the point of giving them a 500 year sentence the guy is just going to rot in there, Isn’t present supposed to be for reform and be able to get back into society not stay there for the rest of your life?

[normalice]

I understand jail is used that way, but it's supposed to be for the purpose of reform. It's just that with all the republican-induced poverty creating criminals and the Republican refusal to let anything in govern, ent function correctly, it doesn't even come close to accomplishing that. But fortunately the solution to that, while not easy, is certianly straightforward: stop electing republicans.

[Stoner710]

Ironically Democrats take more money from you from their tax and spend, Republican tax bills you actually keep more of your money. Trust republicans when it comes to financial stuff. When it comes to climate change trust Democrats (come up with better solutions in the green new deal like nuclear energy but that’s a different topic). And are supposed to elect Democrats who have gone nuts? Again if this was 90s early 2000s I would vote Democratic, right now i’m not going to support the party that supports the progressive left a. k. a. Bernie Sanders or AOC, or anyone pushing that Ebrom X Kennedy bullshit about how to be an anti racist. Nor am I going to support the party to cancel Dr. Seuss. Again get your shit together or just check out California Washington and Oregon are the union allow me to move to Idaho and I’ll be good. Cuz they hurt your case, until they are kicked out of the party I’m not voting Democrat. I’m more anti left I guess. But again for people like the park with shooter and you’re not gonna get reform I wouldn’t to trust that guy out on the streets at 90

[normalice]

That's what republocans say happens but in reality the only reason there is even the appearance of truth to it is because the blow up the debt to cover for lost tax revenue every time they take charge. And they increase taxes for the no rich, too, they just write it so the tax hikes don't kick in for several years, so when democrats inevitable take over people blame them. The tax bill the republicans passed in 2019 does exactly this, in fact. The tax increases for the non rich begin next year, whereas the tax cuts for the rich were made permanent. As for all your fake reasons to oppose modern democrats, that's just the culture war b. s. the republicans conjure up because they don't have any policy ideas to run on - except the one, that there should be no further policy ideas. Just give the the money and shut about it. Spend your energy being mad about how nice the libtards are to brown people or whatever.

[Stoner710]

Except Democrats aren’t nice to Black people as a matter fact they’re pretty much taken the idea of the bourgeoisie applying that to white people and the proletariat as every other race. The culture war is basically battling this cancel culture, Like what happened with Gina Carano Dr. Seuss etc, We’re also fighting again the Marxism the progressive want to implement. If the idea comes from Germany it’s probably a bad one as far as politics goes. Your right about the lowing taxes and then spending like hell. My tax plan would consist of either a flat tax or completely getting rid of income tax and only using sale luxury and sin tax. Of course you would have to cut spending else where like military, social Security welfare that kind of stuff

[normalice]

Not sure what far right fake news spun that weird fantasy about the bourgeoisie, but I think if you went back and tried to relive how they tricked you into believing it you wouldn't buy it a second time. Cancel culture is easy to battle: just stop pretending it exists. "What happened to Dr. Seuss" was the owner decided, without anyone asking, to stop printing 6 of their 200+ books because of racist imagery. The far right fake news, always eager to feign victimhood, decided this was the same thing as trumps Twitter being banned for trying to overthrow the U. S. German politics had nazis overtake their political system for, at most, ten years. That's hardly a good reason to say anything for all time that comes from Germany must be bad. We had slavery for like 200 years. Does that mean any American political system must also be bad? Because that would cover anything you come up with, too, you know..

[Stoner710]

Actually I came up with that one. About the bourgeoisie because it seems like they’re doing that. Why are they telling white people that your racist because your white. Last time I checked none of us on slaves none of us supported Jim Crowe laws unless you’re already age of 70. So again it seems like they’re trying to turn the bourgeoisie into all white people and the proletariat into everyone from every other race. This is what the rate means by culture wars if we don’t fight the culture war we will turn into a communist nation. Every single cartoon that has ever been drawn can be considered to be a racist depiction of any race. Look at Biscuit Oliva in the show Baki the guy is a massive black guy who will fight anyone or Barack from pokemon, stereo type half black half Asian guy should we just get rid of all cartoons that aren’t based off of animals? Gina Carano was fired for making a holocaust comparison but Pedro Pascal who did the same thing was not fired. Why because Gina Carano is a conservative if they were consistent they would have to take down the Mandalorian completely. People who are professors are losing their jobs for saying the N-word when they are reading people like Frederick Douglass who use the N-word constantly. They’re saying it’s racist no matter what they’re not taking anti-consider ration the context or if they’re quoting a hair Storico figures or not our only Black people allowed to quote historical black figures now? Stop acting like cancel culture does not exist.

[Stoner710]

And yes we had slavery for the less than 100 years in this country. That idea actually came from Spain the first slaves sold to the British in the New World was sold by the Spaniards To a black guy. The United States started in 1776 had slaves for about 90 years. The reason why I say any idea that comes out of Germany is a bad idea is because of Nazism and communism communism they come out of Germany so we should listen to their music but not their political ideas. If you actually think about a Germany is responsible for all the deaths in Communist Russia all the deaths in Communist China Cuba and everywhere else on the planet where communism has gained a foothold

[normalice]

"They" aren't telling anyone they are racist because they are white. That's merelt what the far right fake news wants you to think to get you mad over something that isn't happening; because they can't think of another way to get you to vote for their mudsill theory. If it's actually working on you I'd suggest you stop subscribing to these scammers.

[Stoner710]

Ok then why are they telling us to be less white? Coke did a diversity training where this was actually said you need to start being last white what does that even mean being less white?
medium.com/.../yes-all-white-people-are-racist-eefa97cc5605

Is that fake news is that’s not a left-leaning article is that a right leaning article is that my own imagination no it’s not I don’t want to live in a country where this type of stuff is common and it’s starting to be more and more common by the day it’s going on in western Europe is going on in Canada is going on in Australia. If her goal is to actually start a race war she’s going a good job of it.

[normalice]

Coke is not "they." And why are you so mad about it if you are also admitting you dont even know whatnit means? This is the first I'm hearing of it because it is far from a mainstream opinion in reality. It's just the eighties who pounced on it and in that bubble it's probably take as scripture outside the bubble.

[Stoner710]

How is this the first time hearing about it. I swear to god if you were in seattle you would be a Republican.
What is Whiteness? An unfairly privileged exclusionary category, based on physical features, most notably a lack of melanin.

While one can be proud of one’s German heritage, French Canadian culture, American nationality, or African American ethnicity, one should not be proud of one’s Whiteness. Whiteness is a forced group membership that originated by oppressing people of color (Williams, 2020). And, it causes psychological and spiritual damage to White people just as it damages non-Whites. White Americans are imbued with Whiteness from infancy, they do not choose it for themselves. People who look White and who have immigrated to America are generally afforded Whiteness upon arrival, whether they want it or not.
www.psychologytoday.com/.../what-is-whiteness

You may have heard the term White guilt. Many White people are reluctant to define or even discuss Whiteness due to the unpleasant feelings it can evoke of guilt and shame (DiAngelo, 2011). Shame is a particularly toxic emotion due to the lengths at which people will go to avoid this feeling, which typically includes blame-shifting, aggression, and other forms of hostility. It may also lead to self-harm to atone for wrongs done, or other dysfunctional behaviors to distract from the weight of the shame. This is why it feels so uncomfortable when White Nationalists talk about “White Pride.” For most of us, it just doesn't seem right. Continuing to accept unjust benefits that ultimately come at the expense of others is antisocial and unethical. It causes the beneficiaries (e. g., White Americans) to have a stake in not acknowledging, seeing, or changing the problematic status quo. Upton Sinclair famously said, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

That is directly from this article in psychology today,

[Stoner710]

You see what I mean, I’m not making this stuff up. This is what Republicans mean by the culture war instead of looking at the constitution and the declaration of independence and thinking yes all men are created equal and all man should have these freedoms (obviously that includes women). Or you can believe the racist idea that one race is better then the other and in order to help the lesser race you have to tell the race that’s in charged to stop being white, when the color of your skin doesn’t matter. It’s articles like this they will actually start a race war.

[normalice]

It's my first time hearing aboutnit because I don't actively seek out the far right fantasy news for its entertainment value. Also, as I suspect is the case with the overwhelming majority of those of us on the left, I did not read let alone endorse your "psychology today" article. The culture war is taking place entirely within the confines if the far right fake news panoramic. Unless it's referring to the endless cycle of the old resenting the trends of the young. That happens but there's nothing anyone can do about it besides die last. Every generation has a petty gripe about subsequent generations, undoubtedly spanning back to the cave days. But it's just insecurity in the face of the awareness of an approaching death that will not slow down and it changes nothing. The old die and no longer have a say in what the young ought to do.

[Stoner710]

Psychology today is a Scientific news source they don’t have a right or left leaning bias. Now I guess all Republicans would be considered far right to you because most Republicans think the way I do I’m actually more left-leaning than most Republicans because I do support gay marriage and legalization of marijuana. And decriminalization of most drugs as long as your doing it in your own house and not hurting anyone but yourself. What I want support is Socialism or big government I think you need to rely on your local localities like I said in the other post the DC area is way different than the Pacific Northwest PNW and even states in the Pacific NW. Our Way there from Northern California is way different than northern Washington it’s better to have local government ruling these areas rather then the federal government

[normalice]

To me "far right" is simply anyone who let's entertainment be a substitute for information. There are many on the left I consider far right, not because I disagree with their conclusions, but because of all the fake news they digested to get there. Because once you are primed to believe fantasy narratives, the right will eventually use you.

[kespethdude]

They should give every single fucker that raided the capital the death penalty and it should happen immediately upon conviction.

[Agape93]

All for it

[0112358]

In the developed world it costs more to actually push a death sentence case through then to just keep them in jail for life because of all the extra appeals etc.

it's a waste of money and effort and legal hand wringing. I'm not strongly opposed to it but the required mechanisms are just this huge complication that isn't needed.

[Stoner710]

How is that even a case it’s a bullet to the head. (Least that’s the way I would do it). Also I don’t want to be paying for murders to eat, Just get rid of them.

[0112358]

Because what actually happens is you move them to death row in a max security prison where they have higher numbers of guards, more control, and then a bunch of government lawyers fight each other for years and years. It's primarily the legal costs that add up, but while all that's happening, they're paying way more for death row prison costs as well.

Check www.thebalance.com/comparing-the-costs-of-death-penalty-vs-life-in-prison-4689874 as a starting point, but the 'article sources' at the bottom are the more direct info if you're skeptical. In any case, in state after state, pushing for the death penalty ends up costing millions more than life in prison would.

You can say 'just get rid of them' but people also want to be really really sure before they do it, and it's just a lot cheaper to say 'we're sure beyond a normal reasonable doubt, you're in jail, if some new evidence shows up in 15 years we'll deal with it!'

[Stoner710]

The innocent man argument again and this is why we have an appeal, however after that appeal we should just take them in a steel room and shoot them in the back of the head. Think of guys like then parkland shooter, We know he shot up the school, why should he have the right to get tax payer funded food, I’m sure People would rather see him dead then knowing there tax dollars are going to feed the bastard

[0112358]

They usually know they did it, they have endless appeals over mental sanity etc. Mass killers are a classic example of that. In any case I'd agree I can find a handful of people where I'm confident the death penalty is appropriate I'm just if the view that it's not worth the huge use of tax dollars, court time, politicians time etc to bother with it. in theory it makes sense sometimes in reality identifying the "sometimes" is a waste of effort.

[Dragonpurple]

I've often thought the death penalty should be quicker, I get having many appeals and going through the system, but it really should not be taking 10+ years.

If you think about it, upon conviction if someone has their first appeal a year later. That is still 2040 (assuming 40 hour work week) lawyer hours a attorney could be working on the case for... a single attorney.

How many hours between each trial does someone really need?

I support auto appeals on death sentences with a limited amount of time to get all the appeals done.

Rapists are the tricky ones though, some women ruin it by calling rape when it wasn't rape. A lady here a few years back, had reported she had been raped twice and then got caught on tape stating if this guy didn't do exactly what she said she would report him for rape. She reported him for rape, then he turned the recording over... and now people were wondering if the two other guys had truly raped her.

I get it, if she is super beat up, and its obvious she didn't consent but how does one determine rough sex from actual rape, when its just he said, she said? should we be killing people if they themselves may be the victim of the so called victim?

I'd say a serial rapist without a doubt should get capital punishment, but not necessarily the one time offenders, who may have thought it was consensual only later to find out its not. I see a time when in society we have to have printed written contracts, stating it was consensual but then someone could she say was forced to sign it.

[JoyGirl]

Interesting. 🤔

[Andres77]

I'd vote for this.
Why is this in sexuality and not politics?

[dudeinohio]

I agree with you

[okeydoke]

Molestation*
Not molest station.

[Stoner710]

Yea that’s what I get for speaking into into my iPad.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

I 100% support it especially in premeditated murders. Some people are just extremely vile and not worthy to live.

[Stoner710]

Agreed

[bullforcucks]

should be abolished everywhere

[Guido]

I mostly agree with you.

1st degree murder: execute

Rapist: castrate them and surgically give them a micro penis. Let the live with that for the rest of their life.

Child molesters: public execution in a painful way such as crucifixion. People can throw things at them as they die.

If the punishment is severe enough then it would be a deterrent and if not society would be rid of them.

[DragonXR]

I support the death penalty. people have no idea the type of monster out here killing and raping the innocent. Where I live a young lady was recently killed ( possible raped too ) on her way home for work. The two main suspect were " accidently" killed by the cops and it was welcoming. I know that sounds harsh , but I live in a high crime place and see the negitave effects of murders on people lives.

[Anonymous]

We should kill many more democrats than we do. The who process has become gummed up by endless appeals by liberal bitches and cunts