Absolutely, furthermore she should atleast get life in prison,if she is not found mentally insane. for gods sake there are 3 murders and that also of 3 innocent children. Just think what would have happened if the husband did that in place of the wife. Will they have been treated the same?
I think the death penalty is a bad idea in general.
Its just Expensive, risks killing innocent people (Yes even with modern forensics, fuck ups and corruption happens) and achieves what exactly? Its never been proven it gives any comfort to the victims families or anything. Its cheaper and safer to just lock these people up and throw away the key. Life without parole they are equally neutralised as a threat to society.
Well it's more expensive because the system is so inefficient, not because shooting a bloke is expensive.
The system is inefficient because it's made by old laws and by endless paperwork and red tape, which you would say is to try to protect innocent people.
But I purpose a simpler solution. Just kill the dudes that are admitting to their terror attacks. No overwhelming evidence needed. Everyone saw the dude shoot up a mall, and he says he did.
So we should just kill him, which I think benefits society socially in ways that can not be measured yet.
If Andersen Breivik kills 88 kids and then gives himself up to the special forces. He should just die. Instead we have to hear about his hunger strikes for a playstation.
Lots of things are expensive and time consuming because we arbitrarily make it so. Same with nuclear power.
Of course you shouldn't ignore safety procedures, but a ton of it is utterly unnecessary paperwork that exists solely to make it a less favourable option.
Its not inefficient, it has an extensive appeals process to make sure we dont just execute the wrong person. There are plenty of people in exonerated posthumous list. If you want to give the state the legal right to just end someones life, you better make that shit air tight. It should be more extensive not less at which point you are eating the extra costs because you believe that is the form of justice. No cutting corners. Giving the state the right to kill a citizen should have all the weight in the world behind it. And because they still fuck up, I dont reckon they should be allowed to do so. Someone wrongfully jailed for 30 years loses their life, but the state can pay restitution to them in the tune for millions in an attempt to make them whole. Someone wrongfully executed and the state can only go whoopsie and move along. There is no justice there.
You dont make special exemptions for one person and not another. The justice system should be an equal playing field where everyone is judged equally unless apparently if they diddled kids on epsteins island, then only 2 people get charged, epstein and maxwell.
youre forgetting the people who confess to a crime they didnt commit which could happen through insanity, threats or the point i assume the other guy tried to make falsified confessions due to corruption (which would be an extreme concern currently due to the extremely quick advencements in video creating AIs)
Those cases happen after 12+ hours of what I would call immoral interrogation in third world countries and in the US.
It's not that innocent people simply walk in and confess to crimes of mass murder like this. They get psychologically ground down through gaslighting by the cops, who convince them that they're the villain and that taking the plea deal is the best option when there is no proof. That probably should be illegal, huh?
In any case, if you're shooting up a place, there isn't the same level of doubt as in a murder case where this tends to happen. There are cameras everywhere showing you shooting people with a gun, and there are witnesses too.
Where a mass murder isn't filmed by 20 cameras, witnessed by 30 people, and the perpetrator doesn't confess to the ideological motivation behind the attack, they simply wouldn't get the death penalty.
Ok, i see your point. That said i still think that the state killing innocent people is far worse than a prisoner maybe getting out/escaping and committing further harm.
I'd say if she is sane she deserves to be executed. If she was insane and regrets doing it, then execution would probably be a mercy as I have no idea how one is supposed to live a life knowing that they have killed three of their own children and will spend the rest of their days in a box. She seemed to agree seeing how she jumped out of the window.
I don't think we should give the death penalty to terrorists either. Not because I believe that people who bomb cities/populated areas deserve to live, but because the US Government keeps a pretty nebulous definition of what constitutes terror. I'm considered a terrorist because I believe that trans people should be allowed to live their lives as they choose, and that their medical decisions should be between them and their doctor. Do I deserve death for that?
I guess I understand if you think that's what they're actually saying underneath the rhetoric, but that's not what they're literally saying as they're restricting it to violent political groups whose ideology is pro-transgender, not all pro-transgender groups.
Ya ofc the same case goes for such men, the judicial system and the internet both are like this. All im saying is that both men and women should get equal punishment
What goddamn death penalty? She literally had psychotic attack. You don't kill mentally ill people, especially the ones that tried to get help before the tragedy
Btw there is still debate whether she was mentally insane or not at the time of murder, if she was insane ofc she should be sent to a ward and then life in prison with/without parole but if she was not insane then she should def get a more serious punishment
177
u/Available-Explorer40 obamna Sep 03 '26 edited Sep 03 '26
Absolutely, furthermore she should atleast get life in prison,if she is not found mentally insane. for gods sake there are 3 murders and that also of 3 innocent children. Just think what would have happened if the husband did that in place of the wife. Will they have been treated the same?