In a motion filed in court Monday, Chauvin said he would never have pleaded guilty to the charge in 2021 if he had known about the theories of a Kansas forensic pathologist with whom he began corresponding in February.
They clearly explained that their reason for opposing the death penalty in the first place is the chance of error.
I oppose the death penalty for the same reason. I have no problem executing serial killers for example. I do have a problem with accidentally executing innocent people.
I’d be willing to say that I’m for the death penalty in the case of a serial killer as long as circumstantial evidences isn’t the determining factor. I’d like to see irrefutable evidence before they are sentenced.
In freak cases that require absurd circumstances, I would never support the death penalty. Someone shoots the man he catches his wife with? Yeah, no. Jail is good enough. That dude isn’t just an outright danger to society. He’s just a dude who lost his shit in a moment and would have carried on living his normal life under different circumstances.
Dude spends 10 years stalking and murdering his dates and flushing them down the toilet in pieces? Yeah, the world is better off putting him on down to sleep forever.
I agree with the first statement, but don’t understand your reasoning for the second. It’s a waste of time to hold each one of these guys accountable for their crimes? This wouldn’t be the first (or last) terrible thing that took multiple steps to dismantle.
You either are in favor of death penalty or you are not. There is no “but in this case I support it”.
They clearly explained that their reason for opposing the death penalty in the first place is the chance of error.
I oppose the death penalty for the same reason. I have no problem executing serial killers for example. I do have a problem with accidentally executing innocent people.
I’d be willing to say that I’m for the death penalty in the case of a serial killer as long as circumstantial evidences isn’t the determining factor. I’d like to see irrefutable evidence before they are sentenced.
In freak cases that require absurd circumstances, I would never support the death penalty. Someone shoots the man he catches his wife with? Yeah, no. Jail is good enough. That dude isn’t just an outright danger to society. He’s just a dude who lost his shit in a moment and would have carried on living his normal life under different circumstances.
Dude spends 10 years stalking and murdering his dates and flushing them down the toilet in pieces? Yeah, the world is better off putting him on down to sleep forever.
This is 100% correct. Any no such thing as halfway capital punishment.
Support when video evidence
AI has come a long way since Floyd’s murder.
Liberals want to murder individuals who do acts of evil. Leftists want to murder the systems that make those individuals in the first place.
Ok so then let’s murder the lack of police accountability. By holding them accountable for their murders.
[thunderous laughter] OK we’ll ask the skinhead slave catching pinkertons to be nice this time.
What are you actually trying to say here?
The sarcasm makes it unclear and I don’t want to assume you’re implying something absurd.
You can’t reform the storm troopers. Anything less than outright abolition is a waste of time.
I agree with the first statement, but don’t understand your reasoning for the second. It’s a waste of time to hold each one of these guys accountable for their crimes? This wouldn’t be the first (or last) terrible thing that took multiple steps to dismantle.
Because they won’t be. The system is set up to protect them. The system was made for them.