- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
Summary
President Joe Biden commuted the sentences of 37 federal death row inmates to life without parole, sparing all but three convicted of high-profile mass killings.
Biden framed the decision as a moral stance against federal executions, citing his legal background and belief in the dignity of human life.
Donald Trump criticized the move as senseless, vowing to reinstate the death penalty.
Reactions were mixed: some victims’ families condemned Biden, while others supported his decision. Human rights groups praised it as a significant step against capital punishment.
You must log in or register to comment.
The State should not be allowed to punish someone by killing them. Capital punishment is merely revenge with the government acting as the hitman. There’s no way to prevent an innocent person from being accidentally murdered. And those 40 people are proof that it doesn’t act as an effective deterrent.
It’s a barbaric practice and we need to end it.
99% of the time yes but the Hitler fact. Assad, Putin, etc. Actual large scale crimes against humanity
There is an adage that says “Hard cases make bad law”. In the end is a case of, what is preferred, let a guilt person go unpunished or punish an innocent person? I personally believe that it is never ok to punish an innocent person. And I think it is not even that extreme when we are talking about capital punishment or be “tough on crime”, it is more like, do um prefer to under punish some guilt people or over punish others including some innocents?
Yes and No.
I agree completely in a fallible system these executions ought never exist.
However creating a framework of rules with outcomes and holding all accountable to them is the most morally / ethically benign thing we do as humans.
The state is the only ethical executor of these decisions.
BUT the system is fallible and made up of fallible people and isn’t always steered for the moral / ethical and as such your last sentence is even more truthful than even you meant it.
I don’t think one should be executed if their moral framework doesn’t align with the laws created by the state.
I understand why we can’t do this today, but I would much prefer the exile method to execution.
I don’t think the government should have the power to kill people as a punishment, with that said I’m also not upset that the sentences of these three weren’t commuted.
I don’t understand the reasoning. you can’t say you are anti death penalty and believe in dignity and sanctity of life or whatever but then turn around and say “except for these three motherfuckers”…
I don’t think the government should be able to execute them. However, I am human, they’re mass murders, and it’s a situation I have no control over, so I’m not going to feel bad about not feeling bad that they’re still on death row. I don’t get to choose how I feel, just how I act. If it were me making the decision, I’d like to think I’d have commuted their sentences as well, even though I probably would have felt bad about doing so.
Although also, thinking about your comment more, I guess I don’t really care about sanctity of life or anything like that. It’s more of a power problem for me. Some people deserve to be killed, however nobody should be making that judgement and following through, because it’s not something that can be accurately judged. No one should have that power, especially the people in charge. When someone dies who I feel deserves it, it not going to upset me. Would I have killed them? No. Would I have prevented their death if I could? Honestly, questionable, depending on the person and situation. Is that hypocritical? I don’t know, maybe. There might not be an effective difference, killing through inaction vs killing through action, but there feels like a difference to me. Life isn’t black and white, I’m driven by a malfunctioning blob of meat, and I do the best I can. I take great comfort in the fact I’m never going to have to make that choice. I hope this gives you some insight into how I view things.
i was talking about biden’s statements, not yours
Oh, my bad. Thanks for giving me cause for self reflection anyways
no worries, good talk
Yeah, it seems weird that a government of a country that one is a citizen of can choose to have you killed. But assisted suicide is illegal.
I kind of wonder if Biden is setting him up to execute Luigi and get on the wrong side of this current populist movement.
The fed has nothing to do with that. He’s being charged by the state of NY.TIL they added on a few federal charges.He is also being charged federally. And that is the capital case.
even if he does get convicted, any execution probably won’t happen in the next four years. death row appeals take a long time.
His incompetence killed hundreds of thousands his first term. This time he was hoping for a more direct approach. Biden spoiled his murderous fun.
imagine running on “the deficit” and then whining that you can’t spend millions to let the state kill someone.
I know of onlt one western country with death penalty: Belarus. And I’m pretty sure as soon as potato dictator dies, it will be abolished.
Provided that microdick Vlad doesn’t pull a Ukraine on the country for trying to have democracy, and entering the EU and NATO
Biden: Grants clemency indiscriminately for 1,500 people Public: Why did you let the Cash for Kids woman free Biden: Commutes death sentences selectively Public: Who made you judge, jury and executioner?
Biden: Grants clemency indiscriminately for 1,500 people indiscriminately Media: Why did you let the Cash for Kids woman free Biden: Commutes death sentences selectively Media: Who made you judge, jury and executioner?
FIFY… Real people honestly wouldn’t care about any of this if the media wasn’t trying to inspire outrage.
I think it’s the opposite. The public opinion has turned on him and so everything he does is critiqued. It’s nudge on by the media but is also the cycle of celebrities du jour
We could have had colosseum executions where inmates fight to the death, hosted by Dana White and the UFC. But no, old man Biden has to ruin the fun.
Good. The more he cries the better
People forgetting Biden is Catholic, and Catholicism is pretty anti-death penalty.
Tell that to my Catholic trumper parents.
I know it won’t make a difference to them (who’re the cafeteria Catholics, now?) but it is an official part of the catechism.
Removed by mod
In theory, the death penalty makes some sense. It’s a right the government reserves for itself (violence) and I think in some contexts it makes sense to be on the table. In practice, it’s more expensive than a life sentence, and it’s a blunt and racist tool to maintain unjust social and state power.
I wish every governor and president commuted 95% of death penalty situations. It’s a major injustice that most executions were carried out, even for those who belief it’s something the government should be doing.
Also, you’re very hardly ever 100% sure someone deserves to die. It’s morally much better to not kill just in case - and there’s been tons of cases where new evidence, like DNA, has exonerated convicted prisoners. You might be keeping someone fed and warm who didn’t deserve it, but personally I’d rather err on the side of humanity.
Like Gandalf said,
“Many that live deserve death, and some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.”
I don’t get it. The death penalty doesn’t seem to deter people from committing heinous crimes. The practice seems more for the families who want closure, but morally we should be above killing unnecessarily. Whether someone is jailed for life in solitary or sentenced to death does not change the fact that they will never be able to harm another member of society.
And don’t get me wrong, if someone kills a loved one I will want them dead, but my emotions should not drive taxpayer funded punishment.
Putting aside some of the practical issues for a moment…
- that legal process makes executions more expensive than a life sentenc
- it’s a tremendous power for governments to have and rife for corruption or making permanent mistakes.
Why should society be obligated to suppord, and securely house people who should never be allowed back into society?
Maybe instead we could put those resources towards restoring the lives of the victims instead of the punishment of the sentenced?
A punitive system leaves the victims out cold where the only solace they can hope for is that the person responsible is punished appropriately.
A better one might provide mental/physical healthcare, social support, and an option for a direct role in the reconciliation process for the victim and their immediate family/household.
I just don’t see how “justice” can be achieved when everyone has paid in and all we get for it is someone locked in a cell or murdered while the people they wronged haven’t seen an ounce of support.
View these through the lens of each politician acting in their personal self-interest (which both of them have thoroughly demonstrated to be their only priority). What do they care one way or the other? This is political theater where they’re playing with the lives of the people in question.
Yes, I also agree that the president that commuted many death sentences is exactly the same as the president wanting to execute all of the prisoners
No, you’re right, fuck me for saying that thing that I didn’t even say. Your made-the-fuck-up interpretation of my comment disproves anything I have to say. This is a really healthy discourse we’re having and it’s not a glaring red flag that you’re so completely full of shit that you can’t even have a conversation with the person in front of you, you have to invent a fictional version of them to argue with.
Can you reiterate what you were trying to say then? To me, these quotes sound reductive but perhaps there’s nuance I’m overlooking:
each politician acting in their personal self-interest
both of them have thoroughly demonstrated to be their only priority
This is political theater where they’re playing with the lives of the people in question.
How are they “reductive”? They’re not purporting to be an exhaustive explanation. STOP TRYING TO INFER MEANING THAT ISN’T THERE.
Removed by mod
When one finds oneself advocating for a contentious position—particularly one with irreversible consequences—without having engaged in rigorous intellectual due diligence, it becomes imperative to pause and examine the foundations of that conviction. The casual acceptance of collateral damage in matters of state-sanctioned execution suggests an intellectual framework built more on intuition than careful ethical reasoning.
Removed by mod
Nor imply it. Idiot.
Removed by mod
Then let your innocent life be the first victim
Removed by mod
Funny how .world mods enforced ‘no calling for killing of innocent people’ when everyone was cheering on CEOs getting dropped. But when ‘edgy’ pieces of shit like this ghoul say “innocent lives? Whatever, the benefits outweigh the costs regardless”, it just stands. I guess the explanation that the servers are in Holland where it’s illegal to say innocent people should be killed, just means illegal when innocent=CEO.
Removed by mod
<citation needed>
This is kinda bad faith as the overwhelming bulk of statistical and economic literature on the matter makes it clear how terribly expensive incarceration is.
Execution does end the money drain BUT our method of doing so necessarily makes it stupid expensive.
The best thing we could do for the thing the person is raging about is stop the for profit incarceration system, remove the death penalty entirely and work on a reform system.
Removed by mod
how are you gonna condemn someone for killing by killing them?
Removed by mod
I can’t help but wonder if this is an assignment to “clear the wait list” for if/when Mangione gets convicted? I don’t quite understand the system but it seems many people on death row spend so many years waiting for the bureaucratic processes to complete before their lives are taken.
The processes that need to complete have very little to do with other death row inmates, so this doesn’t particularly make much sense.
Death penalty cases ostensibly get the most “due process”, as you would expect, and the time is spent in appeals etc. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a barbaric system, we handle it terribly, and I’d say we routinely execute innocent people. But I can’t think of any way this clemency will help them kill Mangione much more quickly.
Thank you for educating a non-American
It’s not a FIFO waiting list.
When you hear the acts of each, you won’t believe that he did this. Makes no sense. Relatives and friends are further devastated. They can’t believe this is happening.
That’s because like Trump, those people don’t understand justice, they only understand revenge. Trump thinks literally everyone is a horrendous person who wants to wantonly murder others just like him. Control over whether someone lives or dies is the ultimate control, and the one Trump craves most. It’s super clear why this is so upsetting to him, he got his favorite type of domination and control taken away. His toys.
Remember that Trump said that “Relatives and friends are further devastated. They can’t believe this is happening.” Without source, and can be dismissed as something he made up on the spot. The families of the victims are a mixture of reactions some are in support some opposed and some can’t be found for comment.
Justice is a feeling. It’s not a factual thing. You can’t scientifically deduce whether justice has been served or not in a specific case.
Some people think eye for an eye is justice, some have other ideas of what justice is.
Yeah which is why we have legal guardrails - to protect us from folks who think “eye for an eye” is a sane way to operate in the 21st century. They can have their opinion, but I sure don’t want them setting what is legal.
I agree 100%, but I was never discussing what should be legal or illegal… Obviously any murder should be illegal. I don’t think anyone would disagree with that.
That doesn’t change my opinion that sometimes murder is needed to affect change and sometimes it’s even the morally right thing to do…
You honestly thought I was advocating for making murder legal?
Many people think murder shouldn’t be illegal actually (and unfortunately). We also have capital punishment in the states, which is just state sanctioned murder.
obviously any murder should be illegal. I don’t think anyone would disagree with that.
If you think it’s needed to affect change then I’m not sure you actually believe this statement as much as you say.
I challenge you to find a single person arguing in favor of making murder legal. I’ve never seen or heard anyone do that.
I think it can be needed sometimes throughout history when the inequality between rich and poor becomes too great, that doesn’t mean I think it should be legal…
You can’t say “something is necessary so I am cool with it” while also claiming you fully support its illegality. You’re trying to have your cake and eat it too. We declare things we do not want to happen at all to be illegal. Yes we accept there are limitations to how effective the law will be in stopping the behavior, but the goal is still 0 instances. If you split the difference at all you are bending your laws to suit your needs and rendering them ineffective in the long run. This is fundamental to a system built on laws. You accept limitations while also striving for perfect implementation and you don’t concoct special extra-legal situations where you ignore them. If you’re doing that then you need to change the law.
Back when slaves were legal it was illegal to kill a slave owner. I understand that and I think that’s how it needed to be. You can’t have laws that killing someone is legal.
On the other hand I don’t morally condemn the slaves that rose up and actually did kill their “owners”.
I absolutely can say something should be illegal but in certain cases I’m cool with it happening.
Exactly this. People with primitive fairy tales telling them what is “justice” should not be setting the rules for anything.
Check out restorative justice models. One in Colorado has boasted 95% victim satisfaction and recidivism crashed from 50 down to like 10%. We can use this data to demonstrate what justice models are better, regardless of a definitive definition.
I know those models and am all for them. I’m Scandinavian so I’m not at all for eye for an eye type of justice.
The original comment I was replying to said something along the lines of “these people don’t understand justice”.
I was just pointing out that justice is a feeling more than anything else. You can point out that restorative justice is a better way for society to go and it works better for most individuals too but if someone says that they don’t feel like justice has been served you can’t say they’re wrong.
They just have a different opinion on what justice is.
Yeah, but that’s not profitable
Some people think the earth is flat - that doesn’t mean it is.
Justice is a pretty nebulous abstract thing, I agree with that, but modern society has a pretty clear understanding that retribution isn’t Justice.
What does flat earth has to do with this? The shape of the earth is NOT an opinion. It’s a provable fact.
That’s why some people don’t get control over what happens to the convicted. We do know our justice system isnt perfect and makes more mastakes than what even the most rational person would find unacceptable. There is no going back once the state murders someone. And unless we have equal punishment for whomever caused a innocent person to be executed by the state. It should be outlawed in all cases.
