Dylann Roof Sentenced to Death for Charleston Church Massacre

[pateuvasiliu]

Killing someone is more humane than long prison sentences

You don't get to decide that. If they want to die, up to them.

Even if you're locked for life you can still do stuff, like work or write a book.

One of Romania's ( my country ) greatest writer wrote some of his stuff while he was locked up.

I'm sure there are others.

[Dellis0991]

I hope they botch his execution and he feel every bit of agony before he goes. Sounds horrible but vile bastards like him deserves that.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

People who say "Im for the death penalty in this case" Are basically for death penalty, own up to it..

No, because the world is not black and white. You don't have to be 100% this or 100% that.

If a person's objection to the Death Penalty is that there is a chance the accused is innocent...then, in this case, that person can feel confident that an innocent man will not be executed.

If a person's objection to the Death Penalty is that it should only be used in the most extreme cases where the evidence is undeniable...that person may feel that the Death Penalty is justified in this case.

- - - Updated - - -

I just don't understand what people expected when they made the decision to be against the death penalty. This is the eventuality of that position, and the extreme. The extreme of the other decision of course is that you are killing literally innocent people sometimes.

You answered the first sentence with your last. "Killing literally innocent people sometimes" is a pretty strong argument against the Death Penalty.

[ranzino]

I hope they botch his execution and he feel every bit of agony before he goes. Sounds horrible but vile bastards like him deserves that.

Well, bad news: as of yet, you cannot execute anybody because USA ran out of ingredients.

[Lenonis]

No, because the world is not black and white. You don't have to be 100% this or 100% that.

Seriously. What is with this forum and insisting on things be black and white? That's not how the world works.

My personal take, as stated earlier is that I oppose the death penalty in general because of the imperfect justice system.

However the specifics of this case do not include any imperfections or possibility for imperfections. The evidence is ironclad, the suspect admitted it. There is absolutely no question of his guilt, so in this case I cannot find fault with either sentence, thus do not oppose it.

It neither makes me pro death penalty in general​ nor a hypocrite.

[quras]

I am against being as bad as murderer, You can't just pick and choose who to kill. How do you do that and have a sound mind that you made a good decision? Whats the threshold? Is it okay to kill two people? Is three to far?

Actually you can pick and choose who deserves the death penalty usually along with 11 other people and only if all agree. You can make a sound decision in that choice because you have seen the evidence. Lack of said evidence and you can decide something other than death. In the case we are talking about, it's pretty cut and dry. The threshold is the laws and what punishment for the crimes are on the books and what a jury of 12 decides to give from their options.

I don't try to play the fence so I can say one person should die so I can sleep soundly at night saying I'm against the death penalty.

That all well and dandy but for many, there is nothing wrong with having the right punishment for the crimes. You don't always have to use it but there are times when it's needed. The death penalty is one of those tools in the box. It's not always needed and it's used fairly sparingly.

I don't ride the fence either. I'm for the death penalty in some cases and in the case of Dylann, he got the right punishment. In some cases I might not be. The world is not so black and white.

This isn't the difference between Robbery and Grand theft auto. You are arguing between the same crimes.

Nothing wrong with having different penalties for different crimes and different motivations for those crimes.

If you are for the Death penalty in some cases you cannot in anyway say you are against it.

Sure you can. I'm not for the death penalty when a accidental car wreck kills someone. However, I might could see the death penalty being used when you purposefully take your vehicle and run someone over. I would encourage the death penalty if you planned out and schemed to run someone over with your car out of hate and then made it clear you don't care that you did it and from all accounts might do it again in a similar situation.

So yes, you can be for the death penalty in some cases and not in others.

Simple as that, don't see why you have to keep making excuses for it.

Because your limited ability to think through the process is mindbogglingly ignorant in why we have laws and what the range of punishments that goes along with breaking them can bring. There are a lot of factors to think through and just because you agree to the death penalty in one case doesn't mean you cannot disagree with it in another.

Killing a person for murder has to be the most hypocritical thing i've seen. I can see what you're trying to say with saying they can be redeemable or rehabilitated but its not about that. If you kill someone for murder you are no better, Not saying I wouldn't personally want that if someone I loved was hurt but there is a reason people personally involved aren't allowed to decide punishments.

Is it really hypocritical? We don't consider ourselves to have higher standards or even being more noble than those that commit such heinous crimes as well as knowing we are ourselves subject to the same punishment should we act in that evil manner. IT's not so much a tit for tat as it is removing a certain level of evilness from the world where it can no longer harm the rest. Prison doesn't always get that done.

Im not sure it falls into hypocrisy to punish those that kill with malicious intent and no remorse with death. Even if you think there are times the death penalty is not needed. The majority do not want to kill people but if you do kill others and under certain circumstances, ending that persons life is the only way to go because supporting them for the rest of their life has little or no benefit to society.

[Resentless]

I am against the death penalty, and I feel sorry that humanity, genetics, or his parents/community failed this person.

It will not make me feel better with him dead. I just feel a small measure of despair that it has to come to this.

This. His death will bring nothing to anyone. The families might feel better that they got revenge, but is that what the justice system is about? Getting revenge for the living? The dead don't care. Maybe there is a heaven and hell or some form of afterlife, but I can't imagine those dead people want this person anywhere near them. Whatever, no love lost either, fuck this guy he was going to rot for the rest of his life regardless.

[THE Bigzoman]

People make exceptions all the time, or have certain conditions. Generally the reason people are against it is because the person may still be redeemable / the proof isn't irrefutable. You are completely ignoring their reasons while trying to bash said people, and that is incredibly silly. Being for death in certain cases doesn't mean for death in all cases.

and really, such holier than thou virtue signaling is really just as hypocritical. No one is that legitimately good.

No, but it does signal an inconsistent ethical basis.

Either you think life is invaluable or it isn't. You don't get to pick and choose when to take something invaluable from someone else; not out of thirst for justice, vindictiveness, or some false sense of security (some of the reasons I've seen people go the "usually I'm not for this, BUT THIS TIME" route).

Because the moment you do is the moment you become a dick.

[Lenonis]

No, but it does signal an inconsistent ethical basis.

Either you think life is invaluable or it isn't. You don't get to pick and choose when to take something invaluable from someone else; not out of thirst for justice, vindictiveness, or some false sense of security (some of the reasons I've seen people go the "usually I'm not for this, BUT THIS TIME" route).

Because the moment you do is the moment you become a dick.

Not everyone is opposed to the death penalty because of how they view the sanctity of life. Once again, not black and white.

[RickJamesLich]

No, because the world is not black and white. You don't have to be 100% this or 100% that.

If a person's objection to the Death Penalty is that there is a chance the accused is innocent...then, in this case, that person can feel confident that an innocent man will not be executed.

If a person's objection to the Death Penalty is that it should only be used in the most extreme cases where the evidence is undeniable...that person may feel that the Death Penalty is justified in this case.

In both of the examples you cited, the person would be for the death penalty lol. It's ok to admit it, if you think the death penalty should be used in some cases, then you are pro death penalty.

On topic: He deserves it, he knew what he was doing, it was clearly premeditated and he has no remorse.

[Varitok]

No, but it does signal an inconsistent ethical basis.

Either you think life is invaluable or it isn't. You don't get to pick and choose when to take something invaluable from someone else; not out of thirst for justice, vindictiveness, or some false sense of security (some of the reasons I've seen people go the "usually I'm not for this, BUT THIS TIME" route).

Because the moment you do is the moment you become a dick.

This right here, Thank you for getting it. Everyone seems to be arguing being for it in SOME cases so they can say they are against it.

[the game]

So I'm torn in the fact that I would be fine if they took this guy out in front of a firing squad and get it over with however I agree with @Connal that we should study him to see if we can learn anything psychologically about him. Though to be honest I dont' know about the organizational system of the prison system. Are people sentenced to death put in with General pop for any length of time or do they stay on death row for their entire sentence? If he's put in with other prisoners at any time I doubt he'll survive long if he's in with the black prisoners

[PACOX]

His kind sees him as a martyr. I can't wait to forget him.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

In both of the examples you cited, the person would be for the death penalty lol. It's ok to admit it, if you think the death penalty should be used in some cases, then you are pro death penalty.

Just like if you think abortion is okay in rape cases you are pro-choice.

[Garnier Fructis]

No, but it does signal an inconsistent ethical basis.

Either you think life is invaluable or it isn't. You don't get to pick and choose when to take something invaluable from someone else; not out of thirst for justice, vindictiveness, or some false sense of security (some of the reasons I've seen people go the "usually I'm not for this, BUT THIS TIME" route).

Because the moment you do is the moment you become a dick.

This can be avoided if you don't think life is intrinsically valuable (in fact I'd argue that almost nobody truly believes this), and are therefore differentiating based on other criteria like quality of evidence/proof.

[Frolk]

I think we should abolish deathpentalty for something worse. Life in prison but with permanent isolation from any other being.
Food through a hole in the wall with no human interaction.

[Jastall]

Let him rot. I'm not for the death penalty, but I can't say I'll shed a tear for his hide.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

No, but it does signal an inconsistent ethical basis.

Either you think life is invaluable or it isn't. You don't get to pick and choose when to take something invaluable from someone else; not out of thirst for justice, vindictiveness, or some false sense of security (some of the reasons I've seen people go the "usually I'm not for this, BUT THIS TIME" route).

Because the moment you do is the moment you become a dick.

Then everyone that is both pro-life and pro-death penalty is, by your definition, "a dick".

[Stormspark]

I'm against the death penalty, but this is one where I can't competently come up with a counter argument to it. I don't think any sort of rehabilitation would have helped, and it's 100% it was him.

I'm strongly for the death penalty, but ONLY in cases where it is 100% proven that the person is guilty, and it is something like this. I'm against the death penalty in cases where there is any doubt whatsoever that they have the right person.

[The Firestar]

Normally, I'm not in favor of the death penalty. There's usually the possibility - however slim - that the convicted person may, in fact, be innocent, and death is the one punishment that is permanent and irreconcilable.

In a case like this though? A mass-murderer who planned out his killing for months? Who has admitted his guilt and expresses no remorse? Who in fact feels pride for his crimes? This is one of the few cases where I feel the death penalty is the answer. You cannot rehabilitate someone like this. Hate has pierced his heart far too deeply. The fact that he has admitted his own guilt is the purest form of irrefutable proof possible. To imprison him would only force the public to spend tax dollars sustaining his existence - an existence that would, no doubt, be filled with attempts to spread his hate. And in the off-chance that he manages to escape? No, death is the only answer for this particular blight on our society.