An Alabama inmate would be the test subject for the “experimental” execution method of nitrogen hypoxia, his lawyers argued, as they asked judges to deny the state’s request to carry out his death sentence using the new method.
In a Friday court filing, attorneys for Kenneth Eugene Smith asked the Alabama Supreme Court to reject the state attorney general’s request to set an execution date for Smith using the proposed new execution method. Nitrogen gas is authorized as an execution method in three states but it has never been used to put an inmate to death.
Smith’s attorneys argued the state has disclosed little information about how nitrogen executions would work, releasing only a redacted copy of the proposed protocol.
Apparently it’s a hot take: there are people who exist that we would all absolutely be better off were they dead.
This guy was someone who was paid to kill another person for a thousand dollars. This is not just “a citizen” unless you’re saying it makes sense to keep people around in society that will fucking murder someone for less than a months pay.
Counterpoint: Given the number of people in government who said government should murder me because of the rainbow pin on my lapel, I don’t want government to have the power to murder anyone even if we all agree they deserve it. What makes you think that this is the one thing the government is competent at?
But bro, it doesn’t affect me now so why should I worry bro man bro dude?
Dude bro man guy?!?
/s
The government is just fine at murdering people, innocent, guilty, it’s all the same. They’ll even fight to kill people regardless of overwhelming evidence of innocence. Sometimes they have to try a few times to kill the person, but if they murder them in the street, its a great way to get a paid vacation.
I never said this is a person that society needs to keep around.
I do not believe that living is a right that can be earned or unearned. It is a right everyone has. If a person is unfit for society they need to be seperated from society. If that means having them in prison for live than that is what we should do. Killing them is done for one purpose mainly: Because it gives some people a sense of justice. This sense of justice however is false as the only justice would be to undo what was done.
Congratulations, the laws of reality disagree with you. When authoritarians are knocking down your door to tear your life apart, remember: you decided to let them live.
It’s like you didn’t even read what he wrote.
Nice. If someone disagrees with you they are diasgreeing with reality? Sure makes sense. And nobody told me i personally can decide who is going to live. Damn man, now i feel bad about all those executions i could have stopped.
Nobody serving a life sentence is going to be anywhere near my door.
Don’t delude yourself – revolution isn’t a lawful action, regarless of one’s intentions.
That’s what they say, even keeping him locked up for life would be cheaper. Also how do you decide what’s gruesome enough to justify killing people, what about wrongfully convicted people they do exist and they got murdered. There are so many good arguments against and do few if any for the death penalty it’s mind-blowing to me how any more or less democratic society doesn’t abolish it.
TL;DR: No, there are plenty of good reasons why the death penalty should exist. The problem isn’t the penalty, it’s the people pointing it at innocents because it’s harder to prove guilt beyond a shadow of doubt. THAT is what needs reform, not the penalty. Otherwise you’re successfully putting more people into slavery when they just shouldn’t be consuming resources anymore, period.
This person isn’t wrongfully convicted, he’s been fighting his death penalty for years. He quite literally confessed, and his confession drove the man responsible for the hiring (it was through a third party) to kill himself.
Yes yes yes, “but what ifs” are very nice for people that don’t actually want to make hard decisions. The bottom line is bad people exist and should be killed. This man doesn’t deserve rights beyond those afforded to people who are sentenced to death.
The expense of the death penalty is related to the trials that are held, almost always in opposition of the ruling. If you were to compare the actual cost of the penalty itself to the cost of keeping someone in slavery, you would find that the numbers don’t support you.
The reality is you don’t have a problem with the death penalty, you have a problem with the people proposing the death penalty because not enough preparation goes into it. Which is perfectly rational, because if they are not proven beyond a shadow of doubt to be guilty then the death penalty should simply not be on the table.
The problem isn’t the sentence, the problem is people not treating human lives with enough respect when giving the sentence. Both things can be true. Literally point to any fascist/ authoritarian and suddenly the death penality doesn’t seem so bad. No one cried for Bin Laden being obliterated, no one would cry for a convicted hitman being killed.
Three counter points:
Those are some wild statements you make. Yes I have a problem with the penalty bc I think it’s wrong, simple as that. But I live in a country where punishment is fundamentally based on the idea of rehabilitation. And that often even applies for murderers. So I think that’s part of why I’m so opposed to the death penalty.
I doubt we can convince each other from our standpoints. So all I can say is have a great day.
I have a problem with your ridiculously vague statement of
The bottom line is bad people exist and should be killed
What makes a bad person? That they committed a crime (which crime, how bad is bad), that they show no remorse, that they are incapable of change (were they born evil or a victim of circumstance)?
You only have to look at how quickly decisions of law are changing (roe v wade for better or worse, definitely worse) to realise deciding on life ending ‘justice’ based on a human court of due process (where even confessing can be flawed) is fundamentally flawed.
How does it impact your day to day if we choose to incarcerate them instead?
But also, a little extra compassion in life would do you zero harm.
Thats simply not true. I myself would very much rather have seen Bin Laden in Jail (and of course a due process beforehand), likewise Saddam or even Hitler…
Even if you’re right, that doesn’t mean we should actually kill them. People are people, they should be treated as such. We can throw them in jail far easier, and to the rest of us, it’s equivalent to them being dead.
Here’s the thing though.
I agree 100% that the world is probably better off without this asshole in it.
But I don’t think we should be doing that. For every one of these guys, you’ll have another guy who got railroaded by a crooked prosecutor, or who will later be proven innocent with better DNA testing. There’s just no way to be sure every one is ‘good’, and I’d rather let bad people live than accidentally kill good people.
government shouldn’t be allowed to kill its own people