• Skyler@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If we believe in the death penalty, then we believe that the state has a right to end someone’s life because they unjustly took someone else’s.

    So if a person was executed and was found posthumously to actually have been innocent, then would we be justified in executing, say, the DA who prosecuted the crime?

    • Quik2007@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah we totally would, and if the original murderer was found to not be innocent we would have to kill the person who killed the person who killed the murderer…

      • Skyler@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        And perhaps at that point, enough people might realize that giving the state the right to execute people is extremely fraught and finally decide it’s not worth it.

        But it seems like maybe the bloodlust is too strong.

    • Galluf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do we ever give the death penalty to someone who kills someone by accident or in an unfortunate situation?

      You analogy might be relevant if the DA knew the person was innocent and intentionally framed them and/or continued to prosecute. But it’s not remotely the same to have done so and been mistaken.

      • Skyler@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Do we ever give the death penalty to someone who kills someone by accident or in an unfortunate situation?

        No, but we sometimes give the death penalty to… people who didn’t do anything wrong? And maybe, just maybe, it’s too easy, too consequence-free, for the state to take someone’s life, if it just happens by accident sometimes.

        • Galluf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The difference is that we don’t give the death penalty to somebody who accidentally does something wrong. And we especially don’t do that in such a deliberate drawn out process.

          • Skyler@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, and I would argue that it’s crueler to put an innocent person through that drawn out process than it is someone whose mistake or carelessness actually caused an innocent life to be lost.

            It is a mistake worth dying over? Maybe not, but as long as there is no consequence to getting it wrong, there is literally zero incentive for public officials to get it right, especially those wanting to prove themselves “tough on crime”

            • Galluf@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m not sure why you act as if all innocent people are completely innocent. It could be that they made mistakes and we’re careless and that was a part of what led them to being falsely convicted.

              Literally zero incentive is an extremely high bar and certainly incorrect.

              I understand wanting to ensure there’s a better incentive than currently exists, but giving them the death penalty for false death penalties is just a roundabout way of stopping the death penalty. So you may as well just do that directly.

              • Skyler@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’m not sure why you act as if all innocent people are completely innocent.

                Wow.

                • Galluf@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  What I mean is that take a situation where someone was convicted of murder, but the reality is that was a false conviction and they were only guilty of manslaughter.

                  I shouldn’t have used the “innocent person” phrasing because that’s too low resolution for this discussion. You can’t always neatly put a person into innocent/guilty categories.