Because there just aren’t that many Americans that care about this issue, unfortunately. I’ve had discussions with straight up dreadlocked hippy liberals and they still use the “you’d feel differently if they killed someone in your family” bullshit. No. I wouldn’t because I have a principled stance that the state should not be murdering its citizens. No amount of violent, depraved criminals getting “what they deserved” justifies the death of one falsely accused person, and we are well past one in this fucked up system.

We are a cruel, spiteful, and violent people. Even our granola munching hippies can’t get behind abolishing the death penalty.

ah yes. let's try to rehabilitate the mass rapist murderers that have dozens of victims.

yeah, we can fix them!

It's not about either justice or revenge. It's mostly about getting rid of troublesome people, because they're bad for business.

The girl had pretty much the worst life imaginable in any rich country, leading to an extremely predictable outcome.

I've read this exact story many times, and it always ends the same.

For that she gets 32 years of pointless suffering, and then a failed attempt at death penalty.

If only there was money to fund help for such people. Anyway, let's spend another billion dollars on bombing children in Iran.

Or maybe its just an odd time to bring it up?

Like this is a story about a woman who had a hellish childhood, committed a murder, and has now been on death row for 30+ years, and the state has botched her execution despite warnings and requests of other methods. And most of these comments are not particularly sympathetic. Acknowledging her broken childhood, is not the same as forgiving or forgetting.

And then you come in with a total non-sequitur about double standards for men. Someone said quit changing the subject and you get a whole mini-rant about how they need to defend their position (not even really a position, again they said to not change the subject).

And just to engage with this, there absolutely is a double standard but its not gender like you're stuck on. You can find people sympathizing with men all over. Anytime an accusation is levied at a man, you will see oodles of people decry it, rationalize it, and attack the accuser (man or woman). You will find people attacking women and men, you will find people defending women and men, you will find people refusing evidence, defending lies, sympathizing with, accusing of, and every response under the sun in favor of or against both men and women. This is a people thing, men and women can be both righteous and/or evil, they can be right and/or wrong.

In short, focus on the Person. Someone's genitals should have zero bearing on how you take in any of the information in the OP's post. Even sillier is to bring up the genitals of other parties. Do yourself a favor, and avoid culture war bullshit like that. Its fine to call out double standards when you're seeing it, but to bring it up out of nowhere is proving you're the one with double standards. You wouldn't show up in some dude's execution thread asking about why women get mistreated.

If you do care about injustices, keep your eyes on the ball. Don't get sidetracked by someone's genitals, or what other people thing about them for having said genitals.

It's a contradiction with what they said, but not their intent.

The death penalty is irrelevant to self-defense and protection. The death penalty is literally only a state executing someone as punishment. Self-defense in the moment is not the death penalty. Protecting yourself is not the death penalty.

But that's what the comment said should be allowed in extreme cases for protection and self-defense. The death penalty.

I get what they meant. Killing another human in general should only be an extreme case of self-defense or protection. But they way they worded it would mean allowing the state to execute someone to protect others.

Countries who droped penal death have seen the number of terrible crimes reducing. I don't think there is a single example where their number have grown. There are hypothesis to explain it.

Also, the only way to prevent a large abuse of penal death is to keep convicted offenders in jail for a long time before their execution ; which negate the economical argument. It was not acceptable on a moral point of view, but it is not even cheaper.

Something costy and not efficient should be replaced by something cheaper and more efficient. Especially when the second is better on a moral point of view.

... 32 years later?

Countries who droped penal death have seen the number of terrible crimes reducing.

countries who dropped penal death convictions are more likely to have early intervention programs because their government is focused on social benefits over corporate profits.

just because they have banned death penalties does not mean that it reduced "terrible crimes".

You are right that nothing proves that droping penal death reduces the crimes. There could be no link between both, it could be a pure coincidence happening in the hundred countries droping it.

Also, and despite a constant populist pressure in each of this countries, very few have reintroduced it (and most of them fastly droped it back again).

Of course, some may have droped it out of diplomatic pressure more than for their population... but still, it brings benefices. Sorry, I mean the coincidental effect on crimes is observed ; and so at the very least droping penal death does not rise the numbers nor severity of crimes.

Keep your eye on the ball (not the balls)

if we're going to have a death penalty, it should require the utmost clarity in guilt and mandatory appeals to be resolved in a timely manner - then do it by guillotine. this bullshit of 'humane execution' is garbage whitewashing to help the people who want executions to be somehow clean and tidy - resulting in these shit show performances and drug companies refusing to work with states. afaik guillotine never requires a second try. you can fuck up hangings, hell even firing squads... it's what I'd pick if I were being executed, not really trusting the states that end with these results.

And despite all those appeals there's about 1-8% rate of wrongful executions. Fucking 1/20 people executed may very well be innocent

Yeah, it's abysmal. The fact that even one innocent person was executed should have shut the whole thing down. But it was never about justice, just expressing power.

There’s a man on death row in Texas named Robert Roberson. He’s come VERY close a few times to being executed (at one point, a few hours) and he’s most likely innocent. He was convicted based on shaken baby syndrome. It’s been disproved a long while ago. Thankfully though he’s getting a new trial and hopefully he’ll be found not guilty. Still sucks that he’s been on death row for decades

They've probably been good for (the prison) business for those years.

The midwife who delivered my kids in the 90's was a lesbian mom, and one of my friends at school (in the 1980s) had a lesbian mom. One (friend) because her mom decided after getting married she was not into men after all, the midwife, she just had a turkey-baster insemination from a friend, was never straight. If I personally knew 2 it can't have been so vanishingly rare.

Not really relevant to this whole rant but it's not like the 1980s were the 1600s.

All of you who think she deserves all of this have been so redpilled you're choking on Raegen pubes.

Any other civilized court would have deemed this guilty by way of insanity and have her sent to get professional help - yet she was denied this.

It all speaks to the barbaric system of "justice" designed for bread and circus, pitchforks and torches - all so a lust for revenge can be satiated.

It is not just and never will be.

It was a pretty brutal and heinous murder.

Suggesting that nobody cares when a man is put to death is a wild suggestion. So increadibly and maliciously ignorant that I'm stunned.

And therein lies the true difference between republicans and democrats. One would kill an innocent person just to make sure the other guilty people suffered. Just like they would kill food stamps for hundreds of thousands, just to make sure one person didn't get more than they "deserved." Just like they would deport millions of innocent hard working people just to make sure a few criminals go along with them.

They're comfortable hurting and taking innocent lives, because all of their moral/political values are rooted in hatred, fear, and spite.

The lack of empathy you show here is similar to the lack of empathy that Christa Pike showed to her victim. You are not so different - but do you have the same traumatic childhood to explain your sociopathy?

Can we please just execute the Epstein pedos and corrupt politicians?

Oh, I sincerely doubt Christa's problem was Apathy. Christa likely felt a little too much emotion, like yourself. But the fact that we're flinging that likeness to a murderer at each other like an insult kind of proves my point, no? Not sure how you missed that irony while typing your reply.

Ok I am clearly wasting my time arguing with someone who mistakes lack of empathy for apathy.

I feel like anyone who goes through what she did would likely kill someone at some point in their life.

I second that, keep bombing Iran and let's send another trillion doll hairs to Israel for universal healthcare

We aren't executing the right people. If you have 1 billion in assets you should automatically be added to the death penalty queue.

Makes you wonder what Slemmer did to provoke the rage of a mentally ill child, it doesn't usually stem from nothing.

Sure, there are anti-death penalty groups out there, but most guys who are put to death — in fact, I'd say all of them at this point — don't get the level of scrutiny this case has.

It's just wild to me that a man can shoot a person in the head, execution style (for example) and only the anti-death penalty crowd really objects to his punishment. But most people generally believe that he deserves to pay with his life. A life for a life. I don't personally agree with that, but that's how it goes. Then you get a woman who tortures a teen girl to death, carves her up while she's still alive, and we're gonna pump the brakes because she's female? It's absolutely a double standard.

I'm of the opinion that nobody should be put to death by the state, that the state should be better than that, but let's see how many come out of the woodwork for the next condemned man. See if it's all over the news like this case has been.

Maybe we should just stop killing people at all.

No a lot of people do point to some pretty extreme crimes (particularly the weird rape torture serial murderers, especially if their chosen victims were children) as their reason for wanting the death penalty available. Unfortunately though I'm on the side of preventing even one innocent wrongfully sentenced, and I agree that the barriers to that are going to get broken down pretty fast.

You don't have to do much to make a teenager jealous. She thought Slemmer was going to steal her boyfriend so they went and killed her.