Livestreaming the firing squad

Execute murderer in public: OMG the HORRROR

Woman strangles her three kids: yOu gO gIrL!!!!
 
Honestly, I think we need a big back public hangings myself. People need to see consequences for your actions.
 
↑View previous replies…
The death penalty abolitionists are just weaklings. It’s literally just NIMBYism. They don’t want the government to actually extinguish evil, but they’re not the ones that have to deal with it everyday, like the prison guards, and we all know these weaklings pay a fuckall in taxes as well. What purpose does it serve to keep monsters like Clancy and Pike alive in a cage? None, other than making Libtards feel like they have a moral high ground.
 
@DistrictPlant The problem most rational people have with the death penalty is that our justice systems have historically convicted too many innocent people. The idea behind the American justice system has been that it is better to release 10 guilty people as long as the 1 innocent among them would not go to jail. On the other hand, right now, the American justice system tends toward having the worst of both worlds. It releases clearly guilty people while at the same time still being far to capable of convicting innocent people. Most people would be comfortable with the death penalty in cases where we were certain the person did it. However, there have been a lot of innocent people citing in jail where the system was certain enough they did it to convict them yet it turns out they were innocent. And in many of those cases, the evidence should have been too weak to have ever resulted in a conviction, yet the system was gamed by some dirty prosecutor or a scamming forensics expert to make it happen anyways. There were a lot of convictions for the murder of infants that never happened due to a prolific expert who turned out to be a fraud. In those cases, there weren't even any crimes. The state was able to unintentionally create a bunch of crimes on the basis of one man's word who wasn't even present at the death and get a conviction. They could definitely do it on purpose if they wanted to, and likely do.

With respect to Canada, unless Canada is completely reformed, I would be against the death penalty here. The Canadian justice system is not a justice system. It is an arm of the ruling party and it does the will of said party. If it got re-instated, they would use it mainly against their political enemies. As Canada stands, they worst criminals get special and compassion from the government. Karla Homolka is already out of prison and they gave her a new name and identity. What justifies that? Is she in witness protection from the mob? What message does that send? Seems to me that it says: If you commit a heinous crime, once you get released from jail the government will put you in witness protection to protect you from the public. We should be disincentivising crime not shielding criminals from the consequences of their crimes. But this is Canadas so of course they did that.
 
@password123 I agree with the small caveat that most of these innocent convictions predate DNA analysis, but of course corruption always exists. I think there was a recent scandal of a DNA tech (?) falsifying results.

And you’re right that in Soviet Clownada we can’t trust anything anymore. I bet that a jury of liberal sheep would be happy to give death penalty to anyone whose elbows are not high enough.
 
Did they ever formally concede this was an Islamic terror attack, or it still just 'workplace violence'?
 
Be grateful that at least this monster will be put down like he deserves. In Clownada, he would probably be out on bail already.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top