- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
Summary
President Joe Biden commuted the sentences of 37 federal death row inmates to life without parole, sparing all but three convicted of high-profile mass killings.
Biden framed the decision as a moral stance against federal executions, citing his legal background and belief in the dignity of human life.
Donald Trump criticized the move as senseless, vowing to reinstate the death penalty.
Reactions were mixed: some victims’ families condemned Biden, while others supported his decision. Human rights groups praised it as a significant step against capital punishment.
You must log in or register to comment.
While I’m overall glad about this, leaving 3 unpardoned inmates really corrupts the “moral stance against federal executions” justification and makes it seem like he is in favor of capital punishment but only for people he thinks deserve it. It also makes it seem like he believes it’s his decision to decide who gets to live and that rubs me the wrong way.
Even the most die-hard anti-death-penalty believer has their limits. It may take Hitler-level atrocities to get there, or maybe even worse. But everyone has their own line in the sand where even they will say “If there was ever a case in favor of the death penalty, this is that case.” That line is in a completely different place for everybody.
It also makes it seem like he believes it’s his decision to decide who gets to live and that rubs me the wrong way.
Since the President has final pardon power, he actually does get to decide who gets to live. It’s a power granted to him by the Constitution.
Yep I’m anti-death penalty, the 3 that didn’t get pardoned should probably just live the rest of their lives in prison. But I’m not going to shed any tears for them.
He didn’t pardon the others, he commuted their sentences to life in prison. Of note, the 3 civilians left are terrorists who committed mass murder and were caught red handed. There are also 4 people on military death row who remain. One is also a mass murdering terrorist; one committed literal treason, attacking his own unit in the middle of the night overseas; one is a serial killer/rapist; and one took three trials over 4 decades to convict of a group murder.
They should probably commute his sentence too…
Yeah sorry that’s what I meant, long day at work. no sympathy for the people on death row, either way they should not be allowed back into normal society.
Even the most die-hard anti-death-penalty believer has their limits.
I’d love a source for this. Personally, I don’t think we should be in the business of killing defenseless people in any context.
What if they raped a baby to death right in front of you?
Then I’d be a witness and therefore not qualified to pass judgement in their case. Conflict of interest.
Man fuck you, you are guilty as well. That’s an instant removal from society. You might want to get therapy you are missing a soul.
You’re getting awfully worked up about the hypothetical baby you’re using to justify murder.
Am I? Would you even try to stop it or would you wring your hands and wait for the police to show up?
Why do you need a source for a fundamental part of human nature? subjectivity
Google/Bing/DDG/Kagi the word…
Because people like to make claims about human nature that simply aren’t generally true. Rather than recognizing the way complex circumstances can shape human feelings and behaviors, I frequently see people break it down into simple platitudes like “humans are lazy, greedy, etc”, rather than recognizing complex realities like the way power erodes empathy.
Isn’t that my precise point but more words?
Humans are complex. Different people will have different values and we’ll have different lines. This is fundamental to the individualistic nature of people.
Asking for a source on something ingrained in our everyday lives is almost a bad faith statement. That’s like asking for a source on every piece of casual conversation just to shut it down.
Do you really need a source that tells you that different people have different values and weigh the problems around them differently?
deleted by creator
I think you’re taking some vague statements and trying to proclaim a universal scientific truth out of it.
“Even the most die-hard anti-death-penalty believer has their limits.”
I’d love a source for this.
fundamental part of human nature. Subjective: (Based on a given person’s experience, understanding, and feelings; personal or individual.
(you mean, like the complete opposite of your statements can also be true?!)
This is fundamental to the individualistic nature of people. Asking for a source on something ingrained in our everyday lives is almost a bad faith statement
So we have fundamental, ingrained states that you’ve declared to be unsourceable (scientifically) and is such a part of us that even bringing it up sounds like bad faith. Real “trust me bro, this is how it is” vibes with no clarity or justification.
That means the opposite of what you’re arguing for though
How does it? Subjectivity is defined by the same things that cause a variance in values and differences in weights placed on problems of others.
Which is exactly what I’m talking about. Humans are complex we all have differing values.
Right, so some might have an absolute no-killing value.
Nope. The most die hard, anti death penalty believer has no limits and literally says “we do not have the right to take anyone’s life, even if they are Hitler. In fact it would be better for society if we got to try to rehabilitate Hitler”.
And I agree with them.People can downvote you but aren’t even thinking it out. Hitler right now is still a projected person for the far-right nazi movement and is brought up constantly. What if he had been imprisoned and actually got mental health care that doesn’t really exist in most prison populations currently (globally that is). If you had a senior Hitler, with life imprisonment, painting fields of flowers with jewish and little blonde/blond kids running around, it would be a totally different outcome in this day and age.
To be possible though the prison system would need completely reworked. In our current system I don’t think it would have the same outcome (since our system has a different purpose than rehabilitate currently). I also think people shouldn’t be able to communicate as effectively with the outside world without extra censorship (that whole no harm to society thing, can still happen if they’re voicing action or calls to violence, happens still currently.).
I understand that and, if you ask me, those 3 guys are pos. My problem is that he said he did it to take a moral stance against death penalty. You can’t do that and go “except for these 3 cases”.
Right, but again…everybody has that point where they say “…except that case”. You and Biden just disagree on where that line is. Even the Pope is eventually going to look at someone who committed some heinous crimes and say “Dude, even the Bible says that shit ain’t cool…”
I’m not sure that’s true. Some people legitimately stop at life in prison and always oppose the death penalty.
I’m one of those. Capital punishment is obsolete in my opinion, since we no longer need to execute people to ensure that they don’t present danger to the civilized population in the future.
I’m confident. Granted, for some people that red line may require atrocities at or above Hitler levels. It may require atrocities that are comically unrealistic. But it’s there. Put up someone who killed a proverbial busload of school children. If that isn’t enough, two. “Yeah, I killed them all, and I raped them first, and I’ll do the same again if I ever escape.”. Someone’s gonna say “Yeah, OK, stick the needle in his arm”, just because they don’t want to take the .000001% chance that he actually does escape.
An extreme example, yes, but I’m sure you get the idea. Everybody’s got a breaking point.
Again, I don’t know if that’s true. People seem to have very strange absolute moral ideas sometimes.
That doesn’t necessarily mean their beliefs are absolute. It just means that the red line needed to shake those believes has yet to be found.
But not everybody is making a statement about morality. He’s purportedly saying “capital punishment is bad and we should get rid of it”. If you make exceptions, all you’re saying is that you’re in favor of keeping it around for really bad people, which is exactly where they are now.
People make exceptions for things they believe in all the time. Religion is a prime example; show me any established religion, and I’ll show you a few dozen beliefs associated with that religion that 99.9% of worshippers conveniently ignore. That doesn’t mean they don’t believe. That just means they have limits.
show me any established religion, and I’ll show you a few dozen beliefs associated with that religion that 99.9% of worshippers conveniently ignore
Zoroastrianism.
Zoroastrianism.
I’d be willing to bet that if you could even find someone practicing the religion, they’re not praying several times a day in a fire temple.
I have no such limits. Death, as a penalty, is always unjust because humans do not have free will. Every action, every thought, has some biological, or neurochemical, or material basis for it’s happening. Inflicting any form of punishment or suffering on the qualia, the conscious experience of someone, for the illusion of choice we believe to have, is actually just inflicting suffering on innocent beings, because we have no choice.
Now, that’s not too say I’m anti-violence. But I firmly believe that every piece of violence should be evaluated as if it was being done against an innocent person. Things like “guilt” or “they deserve it” should not be taken into the calculation when doing violence at all, only the benefits it has to the rest of society. If you are in the position to levy death as a punishment, I would rather just see them locked up for life.
Death, as a penalty, is always unjust because humans do not have free will.
By this logic, all laws are unjust and humans aren’t responsible for their actions.
humans aren’t responsible for their actions.
Yes! Humans are indeed, not culpable for their actions because we have no free will.
Now, I won’t go into the nuances of laws here, but I do find punishing people for the sake of punishment, or out of some sense of “they deserve it” to be problematic because all humans are innocent.
The only thing that I can come to the conclusion is that two of the three are neo-nazis.
He could be sending a message, and that’s what Trump is actually pissed about.
The Boston bomber I can’t justify with that same line of thinking though.
Executions are barbaric, plus life in prison is far more cruel anyway.
He could be sending a message, and that’s what Trump is actually pissed about.
That actually makes sense.
A world leader like the president is deciding on deaths every single day. You are right to think it’s unsavory, but it certainly isn’t unique to this pardoning.
That may be true but singling out 3 people who are currently harmless and saying “you get to die” feels somehow different.
He probably did that the day before and the day after.
well, regardless whether he or anyone believes it or not, it quite literally was his decision to make
Devil’s advocate: do the last 3 deserve it? Are they unsafe to other inmates and also not possible candidates for rehabilitation and release to society?
If yes… Welp.
That’s the point of taking a “moral stance against federal executions”, though — nobody deserves it.
Yeah… Most people don’t. Some do.
Pretty clear donvict knows his qon “pro-life” fanbase is bloodthirsty, and they demand sacrifices.
Yea, this group largely believes an execution sends them to hell sooner to suffer more. As someone who isn’t religious, I’d rather they waste away in jail, as that is much more a punishment than a quick death.
Prison should be rehabilatative, not punitive
Prison is an sentence, thus a form of punishment, as well as a rehabilitation procedure, as well as mean of protection of the public.
Death sentence on the other hand, is a moronic form of punishment as well as ineffective,because it doesn’t prevent the crimes themselves
Prison is an sentence, thus a form of punishment, as well as a rehabilitation procedure, as well as mean of protection of the public.
Not in the United States, it isn’t. The system isn’t designed to rehabilitate offenders; it’s designed to encourage recidivism:
- Background and criminal record checks for jobs outside of high security or confidentiality fields.
- Background check for renting housing post release.
- Anti-homelessness and loitering laws.
- In some states where it hasn’t yet been banned, criminals may have to pay back the prison as part of parole conditions.
But, why would any civilized country allow that to happen? Because the 13th amendment has an exemption for criminals serving their punishment. Prisons can use inmates for mass labor and contracting while paying them a fraction of the value they are producing, generating profit.
People forgetting Biden is Catholic, and Catholicism is pretty anti-death penalty.
Removed by mod
Tell that to my Catholic trumper parents.
I know it won’t make a difference to them (who’re the cafeteria Catholics, now?) but it is an official part of the catechism.
Neither Orwell nor Bradbury nor Vonnegut could have come up with anything so bizarre and upside down as to have a complete criminal and felon pretend that he cares about law and order.
deleted by creator
View these through the lens of each politician acting in their personal self-interest (which both of them have thoroughly demonstrated to be their only priority). What do they care one way or the other? This is political theater where they’re playing with the lives of the people in question.
Yes, I also agree that the president that commuted many death sentences is exactly the same as the president wanting to execute all of the prisoners
No, you’re right, fuck me for saying that thing that I didn’t even say. Your made-the-fuck-up interpretation of my comment disproves anything I have to say. This is a really healthy discourse we’re having and it’s not a glaring red flag that you’re so completely full of shit that you can’t even have a conversation with the person in front of you, you have to invent a fictional version of them to argue with.
Can you reiterate what you were trying to say then? To me, these quotes sound reductive but perhaps there’s nuance I’m overlooking:
each politician acting in their personal self-interest
both of them have thoroughly demonstrated to be their only priority
This is political theater where they’re playing with the lives of the people in question.
How are they “reductive”? They’re not purporting to be an exhaustive explanation. STOP TRYING TO INFER MEANING THAT ISN’T THERE.
imagine running on “the deficit” and then whining that you can’t spend millions to let the state kill someone.
We could have had colosseum executions where inmates fight to the death, hosted by Dana White and the UFC. But no, old man Biden has to ruin the fun.
It’s odd when you think about it. Republicans don’t want abortion but whole heartedly support executions. Democrats are against executions but whole heartedly support abortion. Welcome to America.
Conservatives aren’t anti-murder, they are pro-suffering.
They are anti-abortion, because they don’t ever get a chance to make the fetus suffer. And golly, the mother barely gets dehumanized at all.
Just think about all the in suffering that fetus skipped by not getting a disease that is easily preventable with a vaccination, and also, it will never know the hell of getting sick from drinking raw milk.It’s more odd to me that the ones who believe in original sin and forgiveness for everything are the ones anti-abortion and pro-execution.
What sits particularly strange to me is democrats that are against capital execution, but for vigilante killings. Any argument to be made against capital execution is a hundredfold true for vigilante execution.
No, one is the state abusing it’s power vs an individual who may or may not be guilty.
The other is an individual risking their life against hostis humani generis – ie, a brave hero.
The vigilante in order to retain support has a much much much higher burden of proof than the state. The state has many opportunities to kill a man, but the vigilante must only attack those who are both obviously evil and obviously out of reach of the law.
Luigi is popular because he met this burden of proof. If he had killed Jay-Z, or even P Diddy, it would not have been popular. After all, the law caught up with them. Before damage was done, no, our system isn’t designed to help people, but it did catch up. In contrast, matt gaetz is obviously evil, obviously outside of the law, and therefore an enemy of all mankind. Im not gonna do it, but I would applaud anyone willing to put their life on the line to take his.
Class comrades are class comrades.
If you really don’t understand why, then I would point you to a quote from Warren Buffet.
“There’s class war alright and it’s my class, the rich, that are waging the war and winning it.”
Now class apologists will claim that WB was trying to foster class solidarity, but that fails to hold water under the scrutiny of his actions. Since, quite literally, the moment that he heard that one of his granddaughters had the temerity to give an interview to one of the Johnson & Johnson kids, he disowned her and hasn’t allowed her back in the last ≈ decade and a half, which seems to have had the desired effect since he has another dozen and a half children and grandchildren, and no one in that family has appeared on camera critical of the system since then.
Source: The 1% documentary by said J&J heir
Edit: Happy Holidays everyone. Remember that the good that you do for your local communities will spread farther than you’ll ever know.
Your reply isn’t really relevant to what they said. You can feel solidarity with Luigi and still think the murder was morally wrong and shouldn’t be celebrated.
Murder is wrong. Luigi didn’t murder anyone. Luigi committed an act of self/community defense against a mass murderer.
No, he didn’t. Deluding ourselves of that will just stop the problem from being truly fixed. Just look at how many people’s take away from this is “maybe now CEOs will be nicer and more empathetic?”. I shouldn’t have to explain the problem with that, but I will expand on it by saying that the CEO is really just a scape goat; the real guilty ones are the owners, who are also the people that appoint CEOs, and who the CEOs have to please. This hasn’t solved anything, and without a systemic change things will just go back to the way they were; if only because we exist in a very fast news cycle and the average person will most likely soon forget and just go back to their daily rut.
People want simple easy answers. This is true for everything, and it’s no less true now. It’s easy to sit at home and make memes and glorify someone else who - despite the fact I disagree with his methods - actually took action and did something, even if it meant risking comforts, privileges, or in this case even a death penalty; it makes people feel like they are doing something without having to take any real risks and without really changing anything, but it feels “effective” because it makes a lot of noise and creates a lot of headlines.
If you really want change, then more needs to be done. And sure, one way would be for more to follow Luigi’s footsteps, but - and I won’t even go into the pitfalls of that path - if you have enough people on your side for that to be successful and not be prosecuted/defend yourself from prosecution, then you could achieve similar societal change peacefully by community building and through mutual aid; side step existing capitalist and government institutions. But that takes actual effort; that takes actual willpower to affect real change; that requires people to be okay with losing some comforts and privileges - this is also true for Luigi’s path, but the appealing part of Luigi’s path is that it “only takes a few” (which as previously stated I disagree with) to affect that change, and those few get to be “someone else” and never the “I” in question. The “I” in question gets to remain at home, on their device of choice, talking about how good-looking, and cool, and heroic the “some else” who took the risk is, and make memes about it.
And that’s one reason I feel so bad for Luigi. While the CEO is the scapegoat of the true (or at least more powerful) capitalists, Luigi is the scape goat of “revolutionaries” who don’t really engage in any praxis.
That’s just like your opinion, man.
Fact of the matter is that he absolutely did commit an act of community defence. He even alludes to that fact in his “manifesto”
Did you bother to read anything I said? Saying you did something doesn’t make it true. Trump has also alluded that his foreign tariffs will bring prices down. Does that make it true?
He still has one shot! No, sorry, I mean he has 3 shots remaining!
He could do the George Carling thing… Upside down nailed to the cross and or launched from a Canon point blank on to a very thick concrete wall. And televise it.
Its just a suggesting to make the best of things.
Good. The more he cries the better
In theory, the death penalty makes some sense. It’s a right the government reserves for itself (violence) and I think in some contexts it makes sense to be on the table. In practice, it’s more expensive than a life sentence, and it’s a blunt and racist tool to maintain unjust social and state power.
I wish every governor and president commuted 95% of death penalty situations. It’s a major injustice that most executions were carried out, even for those who belief it’s something the government should be doing.
Also, you’re very hardly ever 100% sure someone deserves to die. It’s morally much better to not kill just in case - and there’s been tons of cases where new evidence, like DNA, has exonerated convicted prisoners. You might be keeping someone fed and warm who didn’t deserve it, but personally I’d rather err on the side of humanity.
Like Gandalf said,
“Many that live deserve death, and some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.”
Maybe instead we could put those resources towards restoring the lives of the victims instead of the punishment of the sentenced?
A punitive system leaves the victims out cold where the only solace they can hope for is that the person responsible is punished appropriately.
A better one might provide mental/physical healthcare, social support, and an option for a direct role in the reconciliation process for the victim and their immediate family/household.
I just don’t see how “justice” can be achieved when everyone has paid in and all we get for it is someone locked in a cell or murdered while the people they wronged haven’t seen an ounce of support.
I don’t get it. The death penalty doesn’t seem to deter people from committing heinous crimes. The practice seems more for the families who want closure, but morally we should be above killing unnecessarily. Whether someone is jailed for life in solitary or sentenced to death does not change the fact that they will never be able to harm another member of society.
And don’t get me wrong, if someone kills a loved one I will want them dead, but my emotions should not drive taxpayer funded punishment.
Putting aside some of the practical issues for a moment…
- that legal process makes executions more expensive than a life sentenc
- it’s a tremendous power for governments to have and rife for corruption or making permanent mistakes.
Why should society be obligated to suppord, and securely house people who should never be allowed back into society?
I kind of wonder if Biden is setting him up to execute Luigi and get on the wrong side of this current populist movement.
even if he does get convicted, any execution probably won’t happen in the next four years. death row appeals take a long time.
The fed has nothing to do with that. He’s being charged by the state of NY.TIL they added on a few federal charges.He is also being charged federally. And that is the capital case.
Biden: I believe in the dignity of human life, except those three guys. I mean, come on man. I’m just being honest, those guys suck. I respect human life, but them? Ho-wha-ya, I-I, they suck. As your senator, I have made this decision, and Kamala stands by it.
Trump: You know, Biden, Joe Bye-den, Sleepy Joe as I call him. Many other call him Sleepy Joe, very smart people. Kamalala lost, I won. Really, America won, America will be greater under my Administration. We would have been safer too, but Old Sleepy Joe, as I call him, decided he would rather have violent inmates live instead of saving the taxpayers millions of dollars and stop giving them socialized medicine and socialized housing, he wants more of that. You know, he wants to spend our country into poverty while letting millions of illegals, many of whom are criminals, just like those 37 terrible people, and the three Joe loved so much to spare, Hunter Biden, and of course the media filled with liars and terrible nasty people. He wants to ruin America every last second he has. But don’t worry, there will be executions, many more, some would say too many, but I disagree. I spoke with experts in executions, very smart men, some women, if you could believe that, and they told me that we could execute many times more people than any president in history. I asked them how we could do that, how would that be possible, they told me about the concept for a plan to execute millions. I asked them, “millions?”, they told me “Easily”. Those very smart experts said we could easily execute millions, and I believe them. So we are going to make America great again and Sleepy Joe won’t be able to do anything about that come January, when my administration, the best Administration, some will say it will be the best Administration ever, takes control and implements a comprehensive plan to deal with the boarder crisis and make America great again.
We could have had Bernie…
If he’d won a primary, sure. But he didn’t. Sanders still had a massive impact despite his “supporters” attacking his party and by extension him. Because they don’t understand how politics work. This isn’t an endorsement of how politics currently work. Just pointing out that you can’t change how it works without understanding how it works in the first place. Something which Sanders knew very well. But his supporters have no concept of. Just being pissy and angry in his name working against him. But not at his request.
lol. I can’t tell if this is an amazing use of ChatGPT or what; but you’ve got trump’s voice down pat. It is scary that that it feels so dead on.
I despise the prevalent use of LLM. That is all off the dome.
I started reading and then stopped to Google to make sure it wasn’t real. 🤣🤣
His incompetence killed hundreds of thousands his first term. This time he was hoping for a more direct approach. Biden spoiled his murderous fun.
