The administration of United States President Donald Trump has announced plans to expand the use of the federal death penalty, including through the deployment of firing squads.
The announcement on Friday was part of a policy document issued by the Department of Justice, setting out the legal argument for various methods of execution.
It touted steps for “restoring and strengthening” the death penalty as integral to the pursuit of justice.
“The Department of Justice acted to restore its solemn duty to seek, obtain, and implement lawful capital sentences — clearing the way for the Department to carry out executions once death-sentenced inmates have exhausted their appeals,” the Justice Department said in a news release.
He wants to watch more videos of executions.
Trump should be met by a firing squad. I’m sure there would be lots of volunteers.
I was gonna say, this is a choice that may backfire, so to speak.
Get a national vote. Anyone found guilty of 30+ felonies must be executed by firing squad.
I wouldn’t want it, but it would get Republicans to vote against it
If I supported capital punishment, I’d be in favor of firing squads over lethal injection. It’s more honest. Shooting someone is clearly meant to kill while lethal injection dresses it up like a medical procedure.
I oppose capital punishment though. The criminal justice system is not reliable enough to only punish those truly guilty of the worst crimes, it doesn’t seem to be a more effective deterrent than imprisonment, and it usually ends up costing more than imprisonment for an offender’s natural lifespan.
Who would do the actual shooting though? For me this presents a problem. It can go two ways:
- We have to employ someone that doesn’t want to kill people, but does it anyway in an act of duty while suffering the psychological trauma every time they do their job.
Or even worse…
- We have to employ someone that does want to kill people, and we’re paying them to do it.
I mean image recognition is one of the things AI is actually good at… Just sayin…
Sure… for static photos of inanimate objects image recognition its ok. It is easily fooled by false perspectives, weird lighting and odd angles but whatever.
The problem is that AI is a shit show as soon as you try to adapt it for real world use. The capability of these things are beyond exaggerated because tech bros lie and bias test results (because it makes them very rich).
Such speculation of using AI for this or that is part of the scam. Best not to do it.
That’s…actually worse than the two scenarios I posted earlier. State built and controlled AI rifle-toting killbots doesn’t seem like a good idea to encourage.
I don’t know, we’re already well down that path already - in this context I think its actually one place where it makes sense if you agree with the death penalty I personally do not.
2022 for reference: https://youtu.be/OcgXru3Z3GQ
I don’t know, we’re already well down that path already
I’m not claiming the technology doesn’t exist, I’m saying that I don’t want the society I live in to fund its expansion and employment by the state against its citizens. Once deployed, it would be trivially easy to employ against not only “the convicted” but any other group the state wanted killed. Even proponents of state level death penalty probably don’t want that.
if you agree with the death penalty I personally do not.
You and I agree on this. I might be onboard with it if we have a way of enforcing it without ever executing an innocent person, and also equal enforcement across groups. The historical data doesn’t like. The death penatly is disproportionately applied to people of color, so the system is broken. This means we cannot rightfully have a state level death penalty.
Select one person from the jury that convicted and assign them the role of carrying out their judgment.
I thought about that too, but juries usually don’t decide the sentence (in this case, execution). Juries just determine guilty or not on the charges. Sentencing is usually decided by the presiding judge after the jury renders its verdict on the charges and are already dismissed.
ACAB
That’s actually why it’s a squad.
A single executioner would be more than capable of delivering a killing shot. Hell, they could just shoot them in the head with a handgun.
The squad means that no one member knows if they’re the one that actually delivered the killing shot.
The squad means that no one member knows if they’re the one that actually delivered the killing shot.
I get it. Its an attempt at plausible self-deniability, but all the people that fired know that one (or more of them) could be the killer. For someone that doesn’t like killing people, I wouldn’t think that’s enough.
It also comes from the military, when you’re executing one of your own as a traitor. So there’s a mitigating factor in there somewhere.
Theoretically any given soldier could deliberately miss too, relying on there being at least one other squad member to make a killing shot.
I mean, not killing people under any circumstances is better.
It doesn’t even make sense in my opinion. In my mind, all of them are the killers, no matter whose exact bullet it was, and I don’t get how you could convince yourself otherwise.
I mean…
There’s completely painless ways to die.
That’s what the whole assisted suicide thing is in civilized countries.
The “problem” is, that’s completely painless, you just go to sleep. And the people who want this, want it to be a painful gruesome death.
It’s not justice or even removing an uncontrollable element, it’s vengeance. And vengeance has to be painful.
There’s nothing stopping an ethical death penalty except the ethics of the people implementing
There’s completely painless ways to die.
…
There’s nothing stopping an ethical death penalty except the ethics of the people implementing
This comment implies that the method of killing is the fundamental ethical problem with the death penalty. The killing part is the fundamental problem for me.
…
Yes…
Any discussion on an ethical way to do something, is first predicted on the thing happening.
There’s an ethical way to cut aomeone’s leg off, that doesn’t mean we should cut Bob’s leg off, it doesn’t even mean we should cut anyone’s leg off under any circumstances.
Just that if we were going to do something, there are ways to do that ethically.
People really don’t learn this shit anymore?
On the other hand, there’re good, ethical reasons to cut off Bob’s leg sometimes. If you hold the view that there’s never an ethical reason for the state to execute someone, then by that definition all those killings are just some varied degrees of unethical.
A prisoner is suffering and wants to die, their life is a constant pain and keeping them in prison until they die would be torture…
Youd make them suffer for years to only die in prison later?
I guess everyone has different ethical lines…
That’s not a “death penalty” though. It’s mercy killing.
First, I didn’t make the argument.
Second, I think most people could draw a line between allowing a suffering prisoner to choose death and forcing it on them.
Third, that assumes that there’s an ethical argument for life imprisonment.
This argument is specious. It implies that there’s an ethical way to engage in any imaginable act and ignores the possibility of the existence of acts which may never be ethical under any circumstance. This isn’t a question of whether someone has “learned this shit.” You’ve created a tautology re: the existence of an ethical means to all ends. One doesn’t need to accept Kant’s Categorical Imperative to believe that some acts can never be ethical.
ignores the possibility of the existence of acts which may never be ethical under any circumstance.
Name 1, and I bet I can justify it ethically.
Like, “if you don’t do ____, then superman blows up the sun” is the obvious one, but depending on what you say, I can dial back some.
Up next, america announces new crucifixion punishment for “politically problematic” prisoners
The people who manufacture the drugs that make you go peacefully have embargoed the USA, because they don’t want their drugs used for state sanctioned murder.
-
Manufacturer Bans: Pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer, Baxter International, B. Braun Medical, Fresenius Kabi, and Johnson & Johnson, have established policies to stop their products from being used in capital punishment.
-
EU Export Restrictions: In 2011, the European Union passed anti-torture measures that prohibit the trade of goods used for capital punishment.
-
And the “can’t take it back” aspect. Conviction and execution of innocent people does happen.
I mostly am just against the state having the right to kill.
But innocent people being killed is definitely a top list issue.
For Republicans this is a feature, not a bug.
Heck, where we’re at now, let’s just ask ChatGPT to put red dots where each person will shoot and really spice up the thing. Turn that room into Equilibrium.
-
Build massive secretive camps that house thousands and thousands of people
-
Raise a personal gestapo to hunt down and disappear immigrants
-
Pass laws that brand anyone left of Reagan as a domestic terrorist
-
Call for more firing squads
-
???
You forgot to profit between each step.
The last step is to privatize all the previous steps.
- Americans continue to do fuck all, giving it their tacit approval
They could have stopped at the prisons then, that’s where most of the profit is.
Deleted by author
They don’t call it fascist dystopia for no reason.
-
He means Death Squads. Every Republican accusation was an admission of guilt.
Yeah but Harris was once a district attorney. So we get this. Its all the Demmicrats fault.
The fact this is still getting downvotes is pathetic.
Lemmys gonna lemming themselves in front of the firing squads they did nothing to oppose.
Trump could run as a Democrat and you’d be on here telling everyone they’re an idiot for not voting for him and that’s why we are where we are right now.
No.
For themselves?
Gee, I wonder if capital punishment is going to be recommended for “anti-American values”, etc.
Totally no way that’s going to happen.
Remember they are setting this bar for justice when the pendulum swings… If I hear one outcry about lifetime sentences for these Epstein pedos I will lose my shit.
Suprised they’re not at the point where they are looking to streamline executions by creating large multi-occupancy gas chambers.
But I guess even their role models started with firing squads, so nothing to see here…
Need to make more room in the concentration camps, huh?
Horseman named Conquest.
We can start with his administration. Most of them have committed crimes punishable by death.
Again I ask.
Does anyone really think those camps are only for immigrants, or criminals?
Bullshit. They’re for us.
