Yesterday, Brian Dorsey was executed for a crime he committed in 2006. By all accounts, during his time in prison, he became remorseful for his actions and was a "model prisoner," to the point that multiple corrections officers backed his petition for clemency.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/09/us/brian-dorsey-missouri-execution-tuesday/index.html
In general, the media is painting him as the victim of a justice system that fails to recognize rehabilitation. I find this idea disgusting. Brian Dorsey, in a drug-induced stupor, murdered the people who gave him shelter. He brutally ended the life of a woman and her husband, and (allegedly) sexually assaulted her corpse. There is an argument that he had ineffective legal representation, but that doesn't negate the fact that he is guilty.
While I do believe that he could have been released or had his sentence converted to life in prison, and he could have potentially been a model citizen, this would have been a perversion of justice. Actions that someone takes after committing a barbaric act do not undo the damage that was done. Those two individuals are still dead, and he needed to face the ramifications for his actions.
Rehabilitation should not be an option for someone who committed crimes as depraved as he did. Quite frankly, a lethal injection was far less than what he deserved, given the horror he inflicted on others. If the punishment should fit the crime, then he was given far more leniency than was warranted.
Agreed. The death penalty should be revoked in my opinion. It’s an archaic penalty.
While it apparently didn’t happen in this case, there are a number of examples of people who have gone to death row, been executed, then proven to have been innocent after all. That’s a huge reason for me as to why the death penalty should be done away with.
That’s is one of my big issues. Another issue is it’s just vengeance. The system should be about justice.
I don’t think executing people makes society safer. I do not think it deters crime.
It obviously doesn't deter crime.
The US is an outlier on the death penalty. Most western countries don't have it, but we don't have higher homicide rates.
That’s always been an excuse in America.
I’ve never one though, I’d murder this person but shucks, they’d execute me. I just don’t think about killing my fellow man in any serious way.
Yeah, this is why I don't agree with capital punishment. Sure, many victim's families will want the perp to die. That doesn't mean we as a society have to be a place where we grant the wishes of blood lust. It doesn't make the world a better place, just a bloodier place.
I agree with you.
Weird.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Or just chuck this up to I’m more socially liberal and more fiscally conservative.
One thing that puzzles me is how many religious people agree with the death penalty.
Alabama Governor Kay Ivey has drawn criticism for denying clemency and presiding over the execution of Michael Samra (pictured) on May 16, 2019, one day after issuing a statement calling Alabama a pro-life state and declaring life “precious” and “sacred.”
The article is from 2019 but it's relevant.
I’m not a fan of linking abortion to capital punishment. The two are different. I’m pro-choice and anti-death penalty. Pro-life people justify it by the actions of the murderer are the reason for his death. Since Jesus was about forgiveness. Seems like prison should be fine. Eye for an eye doesn’t mean you have to execute the person. I often see that quoted for the death penalty.
Saying life is sacred the day before you refuse to save someone's life is hypocritical.
If life is so sacred you will protect it at all costs and if you don't then you don't believe life is that sacred.
That’s a child’s life. It hasn’t done wrong. The adult did wrong.
I get the logic. I just don’t agree with it. I think life is sacred but I don’t have an issue with abortion.
Since I’m against the death penalty does that make my a hypocrite ?
It’s why I don’t like to link the two. Otherwise pro-choice people should be pro-death mentally. The two are very different.
I'm pointing out that they are saying life is sacred but they mean only some lives are sacred.
Trying to reverse that doesn't make any sense and it's part of the circular reasoning that you seem to have mastered.
The difference is that I don’t think most pro-choice people think life is sacred. For myself, I believe the killing is primarily wrong due to the suffering it causes, and also due to preventing further joy in that person’s life.
Abortions don’t cause much, if any suffering, and the effects on future joy are ambiguous. I don’t think the available evidence in this framework supports banning abortions, which itself clearly does cause suffering.
In contrast, if you believe life is sacred, it’s very strange to then decide to defile or destroy this sacred thing for any reason. The sacred is not subject to this sort of cost and benefit analysis.
I think all life is sacred. Doesn’t mean it doesn’t need to terminated at some point but we need to do it only when necessary. I grew up Catholic. The host is sacred but we still ate it. It just means you treat it with respect.
If you can respectfully execute, why can’t you respectfully abort? I don’t see much difference. The point is that if life is fundamentally sacred, why is guilt or innocence even a factor in that sacredness?
I’m not against abortion.
Fair enough, I misread above. But the point still stands—I think you can link the two for pro-life but it doesn’t hold up for pro-choice.
Also, you got some spicy downvoters lol. Not sure what you said or who is even in this 8-day old thread besides us. Looks like it’s every comment of yours… did you piss someone off enough that they sent a bot squad after you?
Yes. There is a guy who has multiple account that follows me around to downvote me. He has about 12 accounts but typically uses three