I am not here to debate whether public executions are right or wrong but
“Carrying out executions in public adds to the inherent cruelty of the death penalty and can only have a dehumanising effect on the victim and a brutalising effect on those who witness the executions,”
If brutalizing here means people are gonna be shit scared after watching this when even thinking about killing someone, then this is a very bad argument
That’s a common assumption that’s based in “they’re all the same over there” style of racism.
The group the US backed in the 80s was the mujaheddin, which went to form the government which the Taliban (a separate group) all but overthrew. The last remnants of the pre-Taliban Afghanistan government was called the Northern Alliance, which was allied with the US when fighting the Taliban.
It was politically convenient for the left to along with a racist narrative to score cheap political points against Dubya, Cheney, Rumsfeld etcl. And yeah, fuck those guys for sure, but it was wrong to go along with a racist narrative to do so. Because of the “they’re all the same over there” kind of racism in both the left and right of the US, there wasn’t much chance for any kind of success in defeating the Taliban.
I actually made a comment about this down below, it’s not a great approach in most cases, but for eg- A serial killer or a rapist, it will show what will happen if you a devalue someone else’s life
Do you think a death penalty for netanyahu unfair, in fact not giving a death penalty is unfair to all the children and women and everyone else he has killed
Do you think a death penalty for netanyahu unfair, in fact not giving a death penalty is unfair to all the children and women and everyone else he has killed
Fair? What does fair mean? Does an execution un-kill the victims? What a ridiculous notion that any sort of punishment for a perpetrator could be “fair” for the victims.
The death penalty is an abject failure. It has no benefits and numerous issues. Practicing barbarism can never be justice.
it definitely will make other people think twice before they do the same thing
There is absolutely no evidence to support that assertion.
There is no proof that the death penalty deters criminals. According to the National Academy of Sciences, “Research on the deterrent effect of capital punishment is uninformative about whether capital punishment increases, decreases, or has no effect on homicide rates.”
I honestly don’t like to trust a country where you can get away for being a literal child rapist, but the above is just my opinion, we don’t even need evidence to know that the standard strawberry method of giving them merely some jailtime is not working either, but whatever, I am not a law expert
I believe that most developed countries have gotten rid of the death penalty, and a big part of that is because it doesn’t work as a deterrent.
Very few people decide whether or not to commit a crime based on the punishment. Most criminals think they won’t get caught at all, or if they do, they think they’ll get away with it in court.
This slightly misses the mark. The majority of crimes, including violent ones, are not committed by people performing a risk calculus. They’re done with minimal thought and more often than not in the heat of the moment. Effectively, they are not crimes that you can deter because for a crime to be deterred, the potential criminal has to assess whether it makes sense to commit the crime. This works in cases of like financial fraud and white collar crime. Someone shooting another person during an altercation, not so much.
That is my point, anyone who commits this should be always caught and be given the penalty, they should not be able to get away, no matter they are rich are poor
No matter what follows this…yes, we do. You should need evidence to believe anything; understanding of course that the more extraordinary the claim, the more extraordinary the evidence needed.
giving them merely some jailtime is not working either, but whatever
Then imprison them for life. Guess what, life imprisonment is cheaper than the death penalty, and can be overturned if there’s an error.
That is the same thinking that those who own hand guns think. They think they will be safer, yet all the stats indicate other wise including all the children accidentally firing a gun and killing a family member. If risk of death was a deterrent, the USA would be among the safest place in the world.
I am not saying you should just order a public execution whenever you want, the judges should decide in which case it’s suitable, you won’t want to kill someone because they accidentally ran over someone, but for a child rapist?, make an example out of them, I am not saying everyone should have a say in whether this sort of punishment should be made or not, only judges with a lot of experience, unlike the america gun issue where anyone can just go up and buy a gun relatively easily
I will admit that part of my mind would support making a public example of any fascist leader, but any public execution or punishment serves only to normalize that violence.
Would I condemn anyone involved with the death of Mussolini? Absolutely not. Best of luck to any Israeli anti fascists in the right time and place.
I feel like the problem is that we make emotional decisions, what might seem fair to us might not seem fair to the victims family and vice versa, I feel like I will let the authorities be the one to decide and respect it, I don’t think you normalize violence by a public execution though, instead you instill a feeling of fear in the public about what would happen if you do such a serious crime
Taliban does a lot wrong, but I can get behind the logic on this kind of thing if I am honest, I feel instead maybe the victims family should be given a choice? Idk
you instill a feeling of fear in the public about what would happen if you do such a serious crime
Do you think the members of the general public are often considering committing those kinds of crimes?
“Gee whiz, I sure wish I could be a serial killer. Too bad they publicly executed that last serial killer, though! I’d better move to the US, where executions are done in private!”
I feel you don’t understand what I am trying to say, but what I am trying is that just one example will probably drop the rate faster than bitcoins value, see places like saudi arabia where crimes are law just because of these laws existing, even if they are not enforced
And no people won’t get violent, that’s like saying people will get violent by seeing a school shooting, it’s not like a person will get hanged everyday, atmost it might be something like every 5 years, especially if they make it somewhat negotiable with the victims family
No. What happens is the spectators get severely desensitized to violence. Especially if the spectators are young malleable teenagers. And suddenly sawing someone’s head off in front of a live broadcast becomes just another day on the job.
Huh? Do you think this way there will be an execution everyday?
People won’t get violent, that’s like saying people will get violent by seeing a school shooting, instead they will get shit scared it’s not like a person will get hanged everyday, atmost it might be something like every 5-6 years, less if there can be some sort of negotiation with the victims family, and if people learn their lesson and stop their murders, you might only see one in your lifetime, if anything we have been desensitized to murder, to the point that we think it’s not such a big deal that people get out of jail in 6 months
This doesn’t make sense. There have been public executions and torture all over the world for centuries, and yet murder and rape were much more frequent than now.
Ofc crime will go down as people get more educated, but crime is still too high, the reason it was so high before is that people though that ‘honour killing’ is completely fine and that rape is a way to show dominance and that women are inferior, but look at today countries like Saudi Arabia and UAE, even if the laws are not strictly imposed, crime is low, it might also a get a bit lower if people start changing their somewhat conservative mindset, our first priority is to tell people that this is wrong, I am tired of repeating the same thing again and again to people but I am not saying death penalty is right in every case, if someone is insane, not educated, then they should surely be given rehab, but people who are well aware of what they are doing and kill for their own benefit should not be given the same leniency (see corporations for eg, and bill gates, who purposely killed millions by privatizing vaccine, all of them are very well aware of what they are doing, and killing for their own benefit, these are the type of people that should be made an example), crime is also low in countries where people are very well educated, but I am sure we can make almost non existent if we combine both, make an example of someone who rapes children for their own pleasure or take someone elses life to make their own a little bit better
The brutalizing effect is the opposite: by seeing this kind of violence, people are more likely to normalize it and engage in violence themselves. That’s the hypothesis, anyway.
Suppose the theory would be that a spectator doesn’t picture himself in the shoes of the executed. Instead they get used to the idea that killing someone isn’t so crazy, if they think they deserve it.
I could believe this, particularly if it’s on some subconscious level. The rational mind might say “that could be me, I better be careful”, but getting desensitized might get rid of some fundamental revulsion. I’d also think the people at risk of committing murder are not likely to trend toward rational thinking, at least not in the moment of the crime.
I see it the other way, ‘if you kill someone, this is what will happen’ we see that killing someone innocent is so crazy that you would be executed publicly as a punishment, what about people who start thinking a long jailtime is not so crazy (It’s arguably worse than a death sentence), and start thinking everyone deserves it, you see the problem? It’s up to the judge to decide what kind of punishment is suitable, not some random dude, and you are right that people who are crazy are still gonna do it, but then by this logic, you should have no punishment whatsoever.
Life imprisonments are dumb, you essentially torture the person for the rest of their life, while not sending any sort of powerful msg of judgement to the public either
Atleast the rational mind is still gonna think twice, it wont in a situation where you can get out of your jail in 6 months, infact it might think it’s worth it if things are really bad
Just because you can see it doesn’t mean you should, children and other weak hearted people should obviously be kept out, the point is to tell the public what will happen if they decide to kill someone
Public execution seems hardly necessary for people to know the consequences, even if you think the death penalty is required. They know it anyway.
From another perspective, assuming attending a mass execution is not compulsory, what audience will choose to watch? People looking to receive a better understanding of what would await them if they comittied crime, or people excited to see violent death or vengeance? No one is voluntarily choosing to watch an execution while thinking “that could be me”, they are thinking “yeah, I’m here to see that evil dude get what he deserves”, in the most “favorable” scenario, some people are there just for pure bloodlust. Either way if these people find themselves in a serious chance to commit murder, it’s guaranteed that either they just revel in the violent death and don’t care about the morality, or they think their victim deserves it (can be as weak as the killer thinks he deserves a relationship, and the victim didn’t want one).
If we look at the data, per your belief we should see the handful of public execution countries enjoying a very low murder rate. They actually do not. In fact most countries without a death penalty at all consistently have lower murder rates than the countries with public executions.
It’s an interesting take to say if you can’t have public executions, you might as well not have any punishment at all.
When it comes to the visceral nature of violent behavior, a would-be murderer is not applying the nuance of “there was a judge involved in all those violent executions I saw in person, but not here”, the visceral emotion is “this dude deserves the same death I’ve personally seen metted out and I’m not repulsed by the concept since it’s jsut so normal”.
The rational mind, to the extent it is keeping a lid on murderous ambition, is already kept in check by the abstract knowledge of punishment. Seeing it first hand I think does nothing further for the rational mind. In fact, many nations without a death penalty at all enjoy some of the lowest murder rates, so long as everyone believes there is an effective justice system and they will be caught and receive a significant punishment. The less rational mind may succumb to the erosion of directly witnessed violent death. Hell, some might even actually yearn for a moment when a stadium of people is looking at him. There’s also something to be said for keeping the names of killers out of the news cycle, as that also seems to be a trigger for killers.
Think of how many abused people grow up both hating the abuse they had growing up but also inflicting it in turn. Our minds aren’t wired for the highest rational consideration of nuance and circumstance when it comes to violence.
I am not here to debate whether public executions are right or wrong but
If brutalizing here means people are gonna be shit scared after watching this when even thinking about killing someone, then this is a very bad argument
It does not reduce murder or crime in general - but it DOES devalue human life
At least they retained the USamerican values after kicking them out
The Taliban were assholes long before 9/11.
The Taliban were US-backed and US-funded long before 9/11.
That’s a common assumption that’s based in “they’re all the same over there” style of racism.
The group the US backed in the 80s was the mujaheddin, which went to form the government which the Taliban (a separate group) all but overthrew. The last remnants of the pre-Taliban Afghanistan government was called the Northern Alliance, which was allied with the US when fighting the Taliban.
It was politically convenient for the left to along with a racist narrative to score cheap political points against Dubya, Cheney, Rumsfeld etcl. And yeah, fuck those guys for sure, but it was wrong to go along with a racist narrative to do so. Because of the “they’re all the same over there” kind of racism in both the left and right of the US, there wasn’t much chance for any kind of success in defeating the Taliban.
It’s not racist to be aware of the fact that the US supported the Taliban after the fall of the Mujaheddin.
I suppose they think something similar about your govt
Yeah, so? There are many assholes in the world, you know. Pointing at some other group of assholes doesn’t make the Taliban not assholes.
Very insightfull. Is that a quote from Nietzsche?
I actually made a comment about this down below, it’s not a great approach in most cases, but for eg- A serial killer or a rapist, it will show what will happen if you a devalue someone else’s life
Do you think a death penalty for netanyahu unfair, in fact not giving a death penalty is unfair to all the children and women and everyone else he has killed
Any cases.
Fair? What does fair mean? Does an execution un-kill the victims? What a ridiculous notion that any sort of punishment for a perpetrator could be “fair” for the victims.
The death penalty is an abject failure. It has no benefits and numerous issues. Practicing barbarism can never be justice.
It doesn’t unkill the victims but it definitely will make other people think twice before they do the same thing
There is absolutely no evidence to support that assertion.
US Department of Justice
I honestly don’t like to trust a country where you can get away for being a literal child rapist, but the above is just my opinion, we don’t even need evidence to know that the standard strawberry method of giving them merely some jailtime is not working either, but whatever, I am not a law expert
I believe that most developed countries have gotten rid of the death penalty, and a big part of that is because it doesn’t work as a deterrent.
Very few people decide whether or not to commit a crime based on the punishment. Most criminals think they won’t get caught at all, or if they do, they think they’ll get away with it in court.
This slightly misses the mark. The majority of crimes, including violent ones, are not committed by people performing a risk calculus. They’re done with minimal thought and more often than not in the heat of the moment. Effectively, they are not crimes that you can deter because for a crime to be deterred, the potential criminal has to assess whether it makes sense to commit the crime. This works in cases of like financial fraud and white collar crime. Someone shooting another person during an altercation, not so much.
That is my point, anyone who commits this should be always caught and be given the penalty, they should not be able to get away, no matter they are rich are poor
No matter what follows this…yes, we do. You should need evidence to believe anything; understanding of course that the more extraordinary the claim, the more extraordinary the evidence needed.
Then imprison them for life. Guess what, life imprisonment is cheaper than the death penalty, and can be overturned if there’s an error.
Anyone who has spend a week in jail knows that life imprisonment is much much worse than death penalty
That is the same thinking that those who own hand guns think. They think they will be safer, yet all the stats indicate other wise including all the children accidentally firing a gun and killing a family member. If risk of death was a deterrent, the USA would be among the safest place in the world.
I am not saying anyone should be able to give a death penalty, the judges should be able to, not teens or children
Can you rephrase as I am not understanding your point I think.
I am not saying you should just order a public execution whenever you want, the judges should decide in which case it’s suitable, you won’t want to kill someone because they accidentally ran over someone, but for a child rapist?, make an example out of them, I am not saying everyone should have a say in whether this sort of punishment should be made or not, only judges with a lot of experience, unlike the america gun issue where anyone can just go up and buy a gun relatively easily
I will admit that part of my mind would support making a public example of any fascist leader, but any public execution or punishment serves only to normalize that violence.
Would I condemn anyone involved with the death of Mussolini? Absolutely not. Best of luck to any Israeli anti fascists in the right time and place.
I feel like the problem is that we make emotional decisions, what might seem fair to us might not seem fair to the victims family and vice versa, I feel like I will let the authorities be the one to decide and respect it, I don’t think you normalize violence by a public execution though, instead you instill a feeling of fear in the public about what would happen if you do such a serious crime
Taliban does a lot wrong, but I can get behind the logic on this kind of thing if I am honest, I feel instead maybe the victims family should be given a choice? Idk
Do you think the members of the general public are often considering committing those kinds of crimes?
“Gee whiz, I sure wish I could be a serial killer. Too bad they publicly executed that last serial killer, though! I’d better move to the US, where executions are done in private!”
I feel you don’t understand what I am trying to say, but what I am trying is that just one example will probably drop the rate faster than bitcoins value, see places like saudi arabia where crimes are law just because of these laws existing, even if they are not enforced
And no people won’t get violent, that’s like saying people will get violent by seeing a school shooting, it’s not like a person will get hanged everyday, atmost it might be something like every 5 years, especially if they make it somewhat negotiable with the victims family
No. What happens is the spectators get severely desensitized to violence. Especially if the spectators are young malleable teenagers. And suddenly sawing someone’s head off in front of a live broadcast becomes just another day on the job.
Huh? Do you think this way there will be an execution everyday?
People won’t get violent, that’s like saying people will get violent by seeing a school shooting, instead they will get shit scared it’s not like a person will get hanged everyday, atmost it might be something like every 5-6 years, less if there can be some sort of negotiation with the victims family, and if people learn their lesson and stop their murders, you might only see one in your lifetime, if anything we have been desensitized to murder, to the point that we think it’s not such a big deal that people get out of jail in 6 months
And ofc teenagers should be kept out
This doesn’t make sense. There have been public executions and torture all over the world for centuries, and yet murder and rape were much more frequent than now.
Ofc crime will go down as people get more educated, but crime is still too high, the reason it was so high before is that people though that ‘honour killing’ is completely fine and that rape is a way to show dominance and that women are inferior, but look at today countries like Saudi Arabia and UAE, even if the laws are not strictly imposed, crime is low, it might also a get a bit lower if people start changing their somewhat conservative mindset, our first priority is to tell people that this is wrong, I am tired of repeating the same thing again and again to people but I am not saying death penalty is right in every case, if someone is insane, not educated, then they should surely be given rehab, but people who are well aware of what they are doing and kill for their own benefit should not be given the same leniency (see corporations for eg, and bill gates, who purposely killed millions by privatizing vaccine, all of them are very well aware of what they are doing, and killing for their own benefit, these are the type of people that should be made an example), crime is also low in countries where people are very well educated, but I am sure we can make almost non existent if we combine both, make an example of someone who rapes children for their own pleasure or take someone elses life to make their own a little bit better
Making an example, as you say, is the opposite of the idea of justice
The brutalizing effect is the opposite: by seeing this kind of violence, people are more likely to normalize it and engage in violence themselves. That’s the hypothesis, anyway.
Huh? After seeing this people will want to kill people? I am talking extra-judicial killing here
Suppose the theory would be that a spectator doesn’t picture himself in the shoes of the executed. Instead they get used to the idea that killing someone isn’t so crazy, if they think they deserve it.
I could believe this, particularly if it’s on some subconscious level. The rational mind might say “that could be me, I better be careful”, but getting desensitized might get rid of some fundamental revulsion. I’d also think the people at risk of committing murder are not likely to trend toward rational thinking, at least not in the moment of the crime.
I see it the other way, ‘if you kill someone, this is what will happen’ we see that killing someone innocent is so crazy that you would be executed publicly as a punishment, what about people who start thinking a long jailtime is not so crazy (It’s arguably worse than a death sentence), and start thinking everyone deserves it, you see the problem? It’s up to the judge to decide what kind of punishment is suitable, not some random dude, and you are right that people who are crazy are still gonna do it, but then by this logic, you should have no punishment whatsoever.
Life imprisonments are dumb, you essentially torture the person for the rest of their life, while not sending any sort of powerful msg of judgement to the public either
Atleast the rational mind is still gonna think twice, it wont in a situation where you can get out of your jail in 6 months, infact it might think it’s worth it if things are really bad
I’m sorry to say that you may be seeing it the wrong way.
The experts tend to agree with the previous commenter.
Here’s one study that discusses potential avenues for this.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/exposure-to-violence
Just because you can see it doesn’t mean you should, children and other weak hearted people should obviously be kept out, the point is to tell the public what will happen if they decide to kill someone
Public execution seems hardly necessary for people to know the consequences, even if you think the death penalty is required. They know it anyway.
From another perspective, assuming attending a mass execution is not compulsory, what audience will choose to watch? People looking to receive a better understanding of what would await them if they comittied crime, or people excited to see violent death or vengeance? No one is voluntarily choosing to watch an execution while thinking “that could be me”, they are thinking “yeah, I’m here to see that evil dude get what he deserves”, in the most “favorable” scenario, some people are there just for pure bloodlust. Either way if these people find themselves in a serious chance to commit murder, it’s guaranteed that either they just revel in the violent death and don’t care about the morality, or they think their victim deserves it (can be as weak as the killer thinks he deserves a relationship, and the victim didn’t want one).
If we look at the data, per your belief we should see the handful of public execution countries enjoying a very low murder rate. They actually do not. In fact most countries without a death penalty at all consistently have lower murder rates than the countries with public executions.
It’s an interesting take to say if you can’t have public executions, you might as well not have any punishment at all.
When it comes to the visceral nature of violent behavior, a would-be murderer is not applying the nuance of “there was a judge involved in all those violent executions I saw in person, but not here”, the visceral emotion is “this dude deserves the same death I’ve personally seen metted out and I’m not repulsed by the concept since it’s jsut so normal”.
The rational mind, to the extent it is keeping a lid on murderous ambition, is already kept in check by the abstract knowledge of punishment. Seeing it first hand I think does nothing further for the rational mind. In fact, many nations without a death penalty at all enjoy some of the lowest murder rates, so long as everyone believes there is an effective justice system and they will be caught and receive a significant punishment. The less rational mind may succumb to the erosion of directly witnessed violent death. Hell, some might even actually yearn for a moment when a stadium of people is looking at him. There’s also something to be said for keeping the names of killers out of the news cycle, as that also seems to be a trigger for killers.
Think of how many abused people grow up both hating the abuse they had growing up but also inflicting it in turn. Our minds aren’t wired for the highest rational consideration of nuance and circumstance when it comes to violence.
deleted by creator
never mind the fact that the taliban also does this for sexual assault victims and gay people not just murderers…