r/AskReddit Sep 25 '22

For those of you who are against the death penalty, what about cases like Jeffrey Dahmer, who literally ate people?

[deleted]

65 Upvotes

437

u/DavosLostFingers Sep 25 '22

Cunts like Dahmer aren't the issue. It's relying on the justice system to be 100% accurate about the person they are condemning to death

62

u/toiletcleaner999 Sep 25 '22

They essentially gave him the death penalty by putting him in general population. They knew he'd be killed

20

u/UncranniedCyanide Sep 25 '22

Even in cases like Dahmer, the death penalty is a waste. Think of how much we could have learned about how a brain like his works, and how maybe someone like him (if it’s caught early) could potentially turn out differently. The death penalty honestly seems like a waste of valuable information to me

4

u/DavosLostFingers Sep 25 '22

Again a sensible response. I'd love to see a positive come out of a terrible situation. But just to play Devils Advocate, that also raises the question of how far do we experiment with people, and even further how people view the research and what is acceptable.

Its a clusterfuck which ever way you look at it

11

u/PunchBeard Sep 25 '22

Ever see that show Mind Hunters? It's pretty popular. Anyway, would criminal profiling exist if all the people those guys interviewed were executed?

Experimentation doesn't need to be some horrific Joseph Mengele type thing. Just talking to a murderer and taking notes is more valuable than killing them.

→ More replies

2

u/Ameisen Sep 25 '22

I feel like you're suggesting vivisection or such, which is very clearly cruel and unusual punishment.

4

u/horriblyefficient Sep 25 '22

they probably mean if he were willing to talk to a psychiatrist or participate in other kinds of documentation of his mental state (not experiments, more like MRIs or something just to get medical images), or if he kept a diary that might be read later.

vivisection is pretty extreme, you can learn plenty about a person without going that far.

→ More replies
→ More replies

25

u/Get_me_Billie Sep 25 '22

Cunts like Dahmer are the reason why people (like me - to be honest) want a death penalty. So that evil fucking monsters like that can just fuck off and die.

That's how abhorrent I think he is. That's how much I want it to go away.

It's very visceral on my end - that I want someone like that to not exist anymore. I've been around cruelty enough to know that this needs to be exterminated.

And yet.. and fucking yet - I know that in America the death penalty is not perfect..

53

u/WillArrr Sep 25 '22

One of the best takes on the death penalty I've heard came from an episode of The West Wing. President Bartlett was preparing for a debate and his prep partner, on the subject of the death penalty, said "Imagine men break into your house in the middle of the night. Tie you up, rape your wife and daughter, and then kill them in front on you. Wouldn't you want those men to die?"

And he answered: "Of course I'd want them to die. And I'd want it to be cruel and unusual. And that's exactly why we don't make these kind of decisions based on emotion."

(Paraphrased. Haven't seen that episode in years, but it stuck with me.)

3

u/oniwolf382 Sep 25 '22

Is it too soon to reboot that show? We need another Bartlett administration.

1

u/StarChild413 Sep 25 '22

I was actually thinking of making kind of a spiritual-sequel but with a younger (if it was an exact-reboot-just-updated people would complain that Bartlett's too old) autistic (because I am and I used to want to be president before I realized I also had anxiety in not just the colloquial sense) president; basically think The West Wing meets The-Good-Doctor-before-it-got-soap-opera-y but the Bunny-Ears-Lawyer is the POTUS

65

u/NoAppeal Sep 25 '22

I think death is too kind. Being locked into a cage for the rest of your life is much much harsher.

I oppose the death penalty because it is too kind to truly those who deserve it and too brutal to those who do not.

Also killing somebody costs taxpayers more than life in prison.

14

u/Outnabout3535325 Sep 25 '22

he did get locked up, he was beaten to death by another inmate. People like him don't last long, much like pedos etc

10

u/kittycoppermined Sep 25 '22

You are assuming that the psychological effects of life in prison on someone like Dahmer are the same as what it would be for a neurotypical person like yourself.

8

u/Cannacology Sep 25 '22

Good point. But at the same time, it’s weird to assume that being locked some place against your will for the rest of your time alive isn’t going to effect even the evilest of people.

3

u/[deleted] Sep 25 '22

Killing them doesn't have to cost so much--I have reasonable rates, give discounts for bulk orders and everything's negotiable.

-4

u/CottonHdedNinnyMgns Sep 25 '22

Okay but why should killing someone cost more than life in prison? I feel like we could change that pretty easily.

14

u/locks_are_paranoid Sep 25 '22

The death penalty costs more because we have to be 100% sure people are guilty.

7

u/Sheepdudebitch Sep 25 '22

And yet we still fuck it up most of the time

8

u/locks_are_paranoid Sep 25 '22

Yes, which is why we can't have the death penalty.

→ More replies

5

u/tinydragon303 Sep 25 '22

I didn't believe it myself but I looked it up and it's apparently true. The legal fees for the court case go up astronomically when the death penalty is pursued versus only life in prison. So much so that the amount of money saved on not locking them up for decades doesn't cover it. States that have a special death row rather than just housing them with the regular inmates also see an increase in cost.

The way it has always been worded made me think that they were talking about the method of execution and it made me confused because I always thought 'there's no way a rope, electricity, or bullets, cost more than decades of basic necessities in a guarded room' but this is the way it is and I now kind of agree with it. We are to presume everyone is innocent until proven guilty and if I was innocent but accused of a death penalty crime, wouldn't I want my case to be better defended and analyzed?

At the same time, I don't believe that people who have committed death penalty crimes should only be given life in prison where they have a chance of being released early for good behavior, escaping, and/or continuing to take up resources that could be better spent elsewhere. I would rather more money be spent on the case that proves them guilty than keeping them alive after we know they are a monster.

→ More replies

2

u/MurderMittensX2 Sep 25 '22

It costs more to house someone on death row than to house someone in general population.

→ More replies

26

u/FrivolousPositioning Sep 25 '22

The death penalty is on its way out, worldwide. It's one of the things that leaves America in the dark ages. No other country will ever adopt the death penalty. Saying it "isn't perfect" implies that it can be improved somehow.

23

u/snapwillow Sep 25 '22

I believe some people deserve death.

But I don't believe our government deserves the power to kill.

26

u/bozitybozitybopzebop Sep 25 '22

And getting that death penalty for Dahmer, you get the death penalty for innocent black people sentenced to death by white juries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrongful_execution

Notice too how many innocent people in America were almost executed:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_exonerated_death_row_inmates

Considering the shitty decision-making above, removing a Dahmer from society is far better than lettting morons decide random people need to die.

As George Carlin put it, murder is murder, doing it in a formal government setting doesn't make it OK.

Most of all, it's another example of 'If it's not my ass, I'll pass.'. I'm not getting put on death row, so it's OK if other people end up there.

5

u/DavosLostFingers Sep 25 '22

Yeah bud I get that. He was a ball bag of the highest order. I agree with you. In cases like that it's hard to go against the death penalty. But as I say its not always clear cut with a solid and creditable prosecution. So it's extremely difficult to have a blanket law

4

u/subhumanprimate Sep 25 '22

Dahmer was mentally ill. He should have been in an institute and studied. Waste of a good scientific opportunity allowing him to get killed

Death penalty neither prevents or cures murder

3

u/Cannacology Sep 25 '22

Couldn’t one argue that keeping them alive in a literal prison is a fate worse than death?

2

u/try_____another Sep 25 '22

Provided the prison is harsh enough, yes. That’s why I’m against the death penalty except when there’s too much risk that they won’t complete a life sentence.

1

u/Cannacology Sep 25 '22 edited Sep 25 '22

One thing to consider as well is the cost of housing and feeding a monster just to ensure they suffer for their actions. Honestly the entire criminal justice system in the United States is broken.

4

u/Whiskey-Weather Sep 25 '22

Being cavalier about a loss of innocents is rather Dahmer-esque, no?

→ More replies

1

u/wufnu Sep 25 '22

monsters like that can just fuck off and die

This precise feeling was shown in an old film "M". Free on Youtube. Excellent film.

The question of whether someone should be killed for something they have no control over is an important question posed in the film. Will nicht, muss... will nicht, muss.

175

u/odysseyshot Sep 25 '22 edited Sep 25 '22

The justice system will inevitably convict the wrong people. Even if this only happens 1% of the time, I don't think killing terrible people is worth the chance of killing innocent people who might have gotten out later with new evidence.

43

u/Tesser4ct Sep 25 '22

This is the conclusion we were lead to in my moral philosophy class in college, and I completely agree. The chance of one innocent person being executed isn't worth it.

10

u/[deleted] Sep 25 '22

One more. There's at least one case where we know for certain that the state executed an innocent man. Guess which state it was. You'll only need one guess as long as you guess Texas.

→ More replies

14

u/SnubbyPears3144 Sep 25 '22

Exactly. It’s not about the severity of the crime, it’s about whether or not the sentence can be overturned if there was a miscarriage of justice.

-3

u/Guinness2702 Sep 25 '22

No, it's about whether it is right or wrong to kill someone, other than as a last resort in self defence.

32

u/-3than Sep 25 '22

This is it.

I’m not against killing pieces of shit. I’m all for it, hell i’d do it myself.

But i’m vehemently opposed to harming an innocent person.

Theres no way to avoid killing innocent people with a death penalty on the books.

4

u/MediumSpeedEddie Sep 25 '22

I’d rather be executed than spend my life in prison as an innocent man. I get it though

5

u/alectromantia Sep 25 '22

And then there's the families and friends affected by the death of an innocent person. Even worse when they're found innocent later. I know my family would rather have me return years later broken but able to council, than have me returned early in a coffin.

→ More replies
→ More replies

21

u/Fizzbin__ Sep 25 '22

Until the state can give life back, it shouldn't be taking it away.

→ More replies

40

u/ambivalenceingray Sep 25 '22

can't look at one case in a vacuum if you are accessing a policy.

5

u/[deleted] Sep 25 '22

[deleted]

→ More replies

12

u/Feathertail80 Sep 25 '22

My problems with it are not really applicable to most serial killers who were literally caught in the act or very obviously the people who actually did it the only exception is Bundy.

As he only confessed to get more time alive and that need could have been milked to get more information, but due to the crowds they didn't really have a choice people wanted that man dead. But that bloodthirst directly harmed the family of victims who's children/sisters/friends body's were never found but could have been if he was just kept alive.

My problems are inevitably the wrong people can be put to death, innocents killed for crimes they never actually did is a dreadful thing and should never happen.

43

u/chaoticmessiah Sep 25 '22

Doesn't change my mind.

Execution is essentially killing another person, which isn't justice at all. It's revenge.

13

u/justgetoffmylawn Sep 25 '22

This.

Executions don't seem to work as a deterrent, so that argument is out. It costs more to execute someone than to put them in prison for life, so that argument is out. And we already execute innocent people, so streamlining the process further doesn't seem ideal.

The only reason we still execute people is revenge. I don't like the idea of state sponsored revenge. This is why vigilante justice is illegal. What I would want to do to someone who killed a loved one is not what the system should do.

The purpose of 'punishment' should be rehabilitation, or removal from society. That's it.

3

u/ConstableBlimeyChips Sep 25 '22

Executions don't seem to work as a deterrent

Beyond a certain point, harsher punishment almost completely stops being effective as a deterrent. The real deterrent to crime is to increase the rate at which criminals get caught and convicted. Very few people, even career criminals, are willing to go through with a crime if they believe they're going to get caught.

2

u/Auld_Greg Sep 25 '22

Explain to me why it is revenge and not justice? Justice is surely just making someone take accountability for their crimes and given a suitable punishment? If someone has killed someone in a cruel way, and there is not realistic prospect of safely releasing them in the foreseeable future, why isn't killing them suitable?

6

u/johnperkins21 Sep 25 '22

You're not taking responsibility for anything if you're dead, so murder isn't a suitable punishment in any circumstance. It's literally an act of vengeance.

1

u/Auld_Greg Sep 25 '22

Maybe taking accountability would be a better word - my point is you are tried in court and found guitty that is the accountability, that is the justice. Any sentence is a punishment, jail, fine, execution - I don't see how one is vengeance and the others aren't? The punishment is just proportionate to the crime, a sadistic murder could then justify execution.

Also, to the people down voting me - I'm trying to engage in a debate here. I know most people on the Internet have forgotten that is possible but it is perfectly reasonable to respectfully question other peoples beliefs (and listening to their response) whilst explaining yours!

→ More replies

52

u/UKKasha2020 Sep 25 '22

What about them? Many people sentenced to death have done horrible things to other people. It doesn't change the fact I'm against the death penalty.

3

u/Samus388 Sep 25 '22

Fair point. You have a moral view, and you're sticking to it. I respect that.

→ More replies

26

u/HaltTreaty Sep 25 '22

The death penalty should be abolished across the board period. As long as there is a chance that innocent people are condemned to death then it doesn't deserve to exist in any capacity. Life in prison is also less expensive on average from a purely economic perspective.

9

u/152sims Sep 25 '22

why would i put myself on the same level as a murderer by deciding who lives or dies

22

u/pinuslaughus Sep 25 '22

It's pretty easy to get wound up about a despicable person like Dahmer. Sure he was a bad man with no redeeming qualities.

There have been approximately 170 innocent people executed in the US. These people are the ones that make me think the death penalty should be abolished.

https://mtinnocenceproject.org/5-innocent-people-who-were-executed-or-exonerated-on-death-row/

19

u/B8edbreth Sep 25 '22

I am not anti death penalty for any other reason than a non zero number of innocent people have been executed. 1 is literally all the justification any sane person should need to want to abolish it. All other pro or anti arguments are superfluous. In the face of that non zero number of executed innocent people you have to be willing to say you are okay with innocent people dying so you can feel like a few bad people get what you think they deserve.

17

u/Holiday_Newspaper_29 Sep 25 '22

Two wrongs don't make a right.

→ More replies

16

u/Farbeer Sep 25 '22

It’s not that the death penalty isn’t deserved in those very certain cases like Dahmer. The question is do you want the government (the same one that runs the DMV, discovers “weapons of mass destruction” in middle eastern states, thousands of other cases of ineptitude….) to have the power to murder those that it finds worthy of the death penalty.

42

u/32-percent Sep 25 '22

A state should never be allowed to kill people. Black people already get years of prison for nonviolent crimes, doubt that this kind of inequality wouldnt translate into the death penalty system.

11

u/FrivolousPositioning Sep 25 '22

Yeah it just makes no sense in a civilization. I don't think there's a single positive reason to keep the death penalty aside from peoples inherent desire for that revenge hit. It's powerful stuff.

30

u/bjh182 Sep 25 '22

I think rotting in jail for the rest of your life with the chance of getting the shit beat out of you on a daily basis is a far worse of a punishment than getting the easy way out by receiving the death penalty.

5

u/dukerau Sep 25 '22 edited Sep 25 '22

There’s a difference between believing someone deserves to die, and supporting the government executing them. Dahmer is one of many who deserves to die for his crimes. But between incompetence and malice in any system (the justice system in this case), I can’t support the death penalty.

5

u/ScaricoOleoso Sep 25 '22

What about every time the justice system gets a case wrong, and an innocent person is murdered by all of us. If you are okay with that, then volunteer to be executed yourself.

4

u/Longjumping_West_907 Sep 25 '22

I used to be a state legislator. I was asked if I would consider voting for capital punishment. My answer was that I would not be able to throw the switch myself and I wasn't going to put anyone else in that position. So there you have it. I think we'd have a much better political atmosphere if more people thought that way.

3

u/scottevil110 Sep 25 '22

My goal isn't to spare Jeffrey Dahmer. It's to spare that 1 person in 1000 or a million who was wrongfully convicted. No amount of guilt in someone else can absolve the responsibility of killing an innocent person.

5

u/[deleted] Sep 25 '22

I'd rather see a thousand guilty men get life in prison than one innocent man get murdered by the state.

It's happened before and as long as the death penalty exists, it will happen again.

4

u/5koalasinatrenchcoat Sep 25 '22

I don’t think its right for me to judge who gets to live or die. Even if people like Dahmer or any other killer did that doesn’t mean that I should.

3

u/enieIe Sep 25 '22

I don’t think anyone should get sentenced to get killed.

4

u/UncannyClown Sep 25 '22 edited Sep 25 '22

Generally speaking, I don't think it's ethical to kill another person even if it's known for certain that they did unspeakable things. The harshest punishment I support is life in prison, regardless of circumstance.

If we're talking specifically about completely incurable nutcases like Jeffrey Dahmer, then my response is that a lot of those people delude themselves into viewing getting the death penalty as the culmination of some sort of grand plan. When that's the case, you could argue that life in prison is actually the harsher punishment, because they have to deal with the fact that their grand plan didn't play out on top of rotting in a cell for the rest of their lives.

EDIT: I actually need to clarify my first statement a bit. It's only true in cases where a criminal is on trial and we know that they have zero chance of escaping from prison. If we're dealing with, say, a monstrous dictator who can only be truly gotten rid of with death, then I'll accept it despite not being comfortable with it.

3

u/Cluefuljewel Sep 25 '22

Doesn’t really matter. In my view we debase ourselves when we take a life. Just as we debase ourselves by torturing prisoners.

3

u/blankyblankblank1 Sep 25 '22

Two things.

If you are for the death penalty, you have to admit that it's okay, under your subjective reasoning, that it's okay to kill a human being, it doesn't matter what they do, they're a human being.

Human beings shouldn't be the executioners of one another.

Secondly, like everyone else said. The main reason to be against the death penalty isn't because of the killers but of the inevitable innocent person on death row. If just one person is wrongfully convicted and killed, we as tax payers are the murderers. We as a society are the murderers, and we're no better than the people put to death.

3

u/Canned_pigeons Sep 25 '22

I would much rather he be taken away and rot in prison, being bored until he slowly over the years shrivelled up and died instead of a “easy escape”.

3

u/OddFeature Sep 25 '22

They would just stay in prison for life I guess. I will never trust the State with the power to take a life even though I’m perfectly comfortable with the morality of killing people like Dahmer.

3

u/Pristine-Function-49 Sep 25 '22

People like Dahmer can be locked up in max security until they die. No parol, no day passes.

They're totally removed from society.

3

u/Sniffs_Markers Sep 25 '22

It is an enormous missed opportunity that psychiatrists weren't able to monitor and study Dahmer.

I don't think the death penalty benefits anyone beyond some savage revenge thing.

3

u/Logical-Wasabi7402 Sep 25 '22

If you can prove beyond any doubt that someone is guilty and incapable of showing remorse, then I guess sure kill them off to free up a bed somewhere. (Not beyond a reasonable doubt, but beyond any doubt. If you're going to legally kill someone, you should be held to the highest standards)

But if they are capable of feeling remorse, then let them fucking suffer knowing how much pain they caused. Legally sanctioned murder is too good for most of them. They deserve to rot for the rest of their lives knowing the kind of pain they made someone else feel.

3

u/EmpyreanFinch Sep 25 '22

I'm trying to live my life with a sense of empathy for everyone, even the worst of the worst. They definitely need to be punished, but there are other ways to punish someone other than execution them. I thought about what it would be like to be on death row and to be executed, and it's horrible no matter how humanely it's done.

No doubt people will ask me where my sense of empathy for the victims is? My question is, will executing the murderer bring anyone back or save anyone? The families and friends of the victims might feel satisfaction at knowing the murderer died, but do I really want people enjoying another person's death?

3

u/GremlineerRCT5 Sep 25 '22

To be honest.... I don’t know how I feel about the death penalty anymore. It's weird how we get to choose something like murder. We get to murder someone for the murder they have done? I mean I guess it's like "You get what you put out", but does that make you any better? I almost think life is a worse sentence than death in that case

3

u/bishopthom Sep 25 '22

I used to be pro-death penalty, then i came to the realization that... 1. Convictions are flawed and this punishment can't be taken back 2. I'm no longer convinced that death is worse then 23 1/2 hour lockdown 3. I don't trust the state with that kind of power

10

u/ikittythefooll Sep 25 '22

For what it’s worth, life in prison is also cheaper than the death penalty

But don’t get me started on for-profit prisons.

-1

u/Tzanax Sep 25 '22

I’m honestly curious as to how keeping a person alive in prison is cheaper. Please explain

8

u/microsix Sep 25 '22

The process of going through death row is so long and tedious and usually will involve many years of appeals and ends up costing the system more because of all the judicial costs and time wasted

5

u/ikittythefooll Sep 25 '22

Gladly. There’s years of litigation involved with appeals and re-trials. That involves lawyers and judges and court time.

Some states have mandatory appeals. So even if the guilty wanted to die, they have to go thru the process.

It’s cheaper to jail them for life, which is actually 25 years.

1

u/try_____another Sep 25 '22

Because in many of the American states that have the death penalty you only get a fair trial and an adequate defence after you’re sentenced to death. Similarly, if you get a life sentence they can keep you in until you die but restrict access to appeals in ways they can’t when you’re sentenced to death, even though it still means you never get to go free. If everyone got a fair trial and access to appeals, death would be cheaper again.

ISTR that in Louisiana for some time you had a better chance of walking free after being sentenced to death than to life.

5

u/HotLizardsInYourArea Sep 25 '22

An unpopular reason, but for me it’s compassion. Even if someone has committed monstrous crimes, they’re still human and deserve basic human rights.

5

u/Guinness2702 Sep 25 '22

What about them?

2

u/WokeIsSoTeens Sep 25 '22

After seeing dozens of people thrown in solitary confinement for a year without a hearing or bail over what should have been misdemeanor trespassing, I don't want the state to have that power.

2

u/MisterAmmosart Sep 25 '22

The dead don't suffer.

Jeffery Dahmer likely wished that he would die once he was officially incarcerated. Jeffery Dahmer shouldn't have any wish that he wanted to ever be granted.

2

u/librician Sep 25 '22

Put him in jail forever, that's how I feel about it.

2

u/kl0 Sep 25 '22

No. Still oppose it for the various of reasons already articulated in these responses.

That said, I find it kind of interesting that people might be inclined to care MORE that he ate people. Unless I'm misremembering the full story (I know there's a new show on it; I'm not planning to watch it), it's not like he took bites out of living people until they died. ...that would be pretty horrible.

He murdered them and then ate them. If somebody kills me and then eats me, I hope people will focus on the killing and not the eating. It's obviously disturbing, but the fact that he ate dead people doesn't really add to the bother -- for me anyways. It's just the murder that's bad.

2

u/fishywiki Sep 25 '22

The question is: what do you want to achieve by the death penalty? The law has to be dispassionate, so revenge or anger or disgust or any other emotion is off the table. We know that it doesn't work as a deterrent. Do you want to punish? If so, a lifetime incarcerated is way more of a punishment than allowing them to escape it. And, of course, there's the issue of fixing it if you get it wrong - you can't just bring someone back to life.

2

u/ndraiay Sep 25 '22

I think that someone like that needs to be in prison for the rest of their life, because they cannot be allowed to hurt more people. But no punishment or pain that Dahmer suffers will undo the suffering that he caused.

On a practical level i don't think the state should be killing people if at all avoidable. Mistakes get made and innocent people get executed. I find that to be unacceptable.

On personal/religious level, I think everyone should be afforded a chance at redemption. The story of the Buddhist Saint angulimala informs my feelings on this.

2

u/ACam574 Sep 25 '22

Still against it.

I agree there are evil non-redeemable people who don't deserve to be alive but...

1) Death penalty isn't cost effective compared to life imprisonment. Making it cost effective would mean potentially executing innocent people and likely increasing the bias against POC in sentencing.

2) It doesn't really create deterrence. The criminal justice system should make decisions based on increasing public safety not vengeance. The death penalty doesn't deter the average potential murderer from committing crimes and it certainly isn't going to convince someone like Dahmer, a nercopheliac cannibal, from doing what they did. Nobody like that thinks 'I would really like to kill someone, have sex with their corpse, then eat them but the risk of being executed makes it a poor action from a cost-benefit analysis perspective. Well guess I should just be a productive law-abiding citizen instead'.

3) It's not humane. How people are executed in the US is usually unnecessary painful. Some attempts are made to hide the suffering of the executed but not really prevent it. If the outcome desired is they end of the existence of a dangerous non-redeemable individual and not the spectacle of vengeance then we wouldn't do this. This is actually solvable currently. We just chose not to do so.

4) nurture vs nature. I can see the death penalty for those that had reasonable opportunity to be good people and chose not to do so (nature) but it doesn't make sense for those that developed distorted moral codes due to unnecessary harsh and warped upbringing (nurture). We as a society can intervene but chose not to do so. In these cases our lack of willingness to intervene makes us equally responsible.

If it would deter crime in a cost-effective manner, even for these type of people, without being cruel or applied to the innocent (or those who had no opportunity to develop normal senses of right and wrong) I would support it.

2

u/bericdondarrion35 Sep 25 '22

Death is too quick. Rotting in solitary confinement is more fitting

3

u/htownlifer Sep 25 '22

It cost more to put somebody to death than it does to leave them in jail for life. It’s an economic decision for me.

1

u/Aggravating-Wrap4861 Sep 25 '22

If it were cheaper, would it be right to kill everyone who is in prison for life?

→ More replies

2

u/Cosmic_fault Sep 25 '22

What about 'em?

It's perfectly possible for a living person to not eat people. If I can do it, so can anybody else. There's no need to kill someone to keep them from eating people.

I don't even understand what kind of question you think you're asking.

Do you think killing someone can un-eat people?

1

u/tplgigo Sep 25 '22

Any and all violent offenders should get life with no parole. Shorter stays for non violent crimes would also be in order especially drug offenses. Capital punishment makes the state no better than any criminal. An "eye for an eye" is childish nonsense.

1

u/Turnip467 Sep 25 '22

Can I just point out he kidnapped, raped, killed and ate 17 boys and men in 16 years

2

u/Khaki_Lapdog Sep 25 '22

Yes, Wikipedia has existed for years and there’s a new Netflix show about him

1

u/Turnip467 Sep 25 '22

He was such a horrible person, and to be legally same when you did that is just eugh

1

u/santino_musi1 Sep 25 '22

They don't deserve the easy way out, lock them in the basement, alone, and throw away the key

1

u/DemonicGirlcock Sep 25 '22

I think in that case death is too light of a punishment. People should be made to contribute back to society.

→ More replies

0

u/desantis2024ftw Sep 25 '22

he needed his protein fix

0

u/M_A_X_77 Sep 25 '22

I'm not against the death penalty. I'm against using it as a crime deterrent. It should be used only for people who:

  1. Have killed multiple people.
  2. Have no chance of ever being rehabilitated.

Serial killers, like Jeffrey Dahmer, fit both criteria.

2

u/electric_shocks Sep 25 '22

Are you saying mentally ill murderers should be executed?

→ More replies

-8

u/Have_A_Great_Month Sep 25 '22

He should have been drawn and quartered with tanks. Same with most serial killers

2

u/Ameisen Sep 25 '22

So, you're opposed to the Eighth Amendment?

→ More replies

1

u/sonoma95436 Sep 25 '22

He received the death penalty from his fellow inmates.

1

u/ThrowRA24000 Sep 25 '22

i'm against the death penalty because if you ask me, killing people like Dahmer is giving them an easy way out. leaving them alive & locked in a prison asylum to suffer forever in darkness is far more deserved.

1

u/FireflyShady Sep 25 '22

I say just support his lifestyle and lock him in a cell with a knife and fork by himself.

1

u/Just_your_FBI_agent Sep 25 '22

I hate the idea that fallible people can have power over other people's lives. If people were infallible, I would be for death penalty

If you sentence someone to death and this someone turns out to be innocent, you murdered an innocent person and there's nothing you can do about it.

If you sentence someone to life in prison, and they are proven to be innocent, you release them and you are able atone for it. At least slightly.

1

u/contemplatebeer Sep 25 '22

He should've been eaten. It's a thigh for a thigh.

1

u/StarChild413 Sep 25 '22

But he can't be eaten-and-then-somehow-brought-back-without-it-being-too-merciful-or-not-the-same-him-and-then-eaten-again as many times as he had victims so lex talionis inherently fails with serial offenders no matter the crime

1

u/Xtreemfartz Sep 25 '22

Death penalty? I think a case like Dahmer they should just do exactly to him what he did to all of his victims.

1

u/StarChild413 Sep 25 '22

But since he only has one life that's still not enough

1

u/[deleted] Sep 25 '22

Only for the death penalty if it is 100% without a doubt. In Dahmers case I’m all for it.

1

u/ChevExpressMan Sep 25 '22

It costs $2-$4 million to execute people. That's 50 years at $60K a year for $3 million let them rot in prison.

1

u/missdovahkiin1 Sep 25 '22

Well, there's something to be said for the state killing people to teach people killing is wrong. I'm personally pretty strapped in the middle. I have my degree in criminal justice and there's a lot of factors to consider, most have already been mentioned. Also the method in which we choose has plenty of issues as well.

1

u/rumhee Sep 25 '22

The death penalty is mainly used in “crimes of passion” and other situations where the risk/punishment is not considered when committing the crime. Because of this, the death penalty does not work as a deterrent, so it has no use.

1

u/heisdeadjim_au Sep 25 '22

I learn to not engage in whataboutery, yeah?

1

u/Sea_Supermarket_2347 Sep 25 '22

Removing negative ppl from your life

1

u/sharksville Sep 25 '22

I’m not really in favour for a stealth penalty. I think that people should be put on death row instead of being sent straight to the electric chair or whatever. Some times people need to be given the opportunity to be able to prove their innocence. Imagine what would happen if someone is falsely accused or prosecuted and is given death, and later realise that a higher mistake was made and the death penalty was given to the wrong person, by which time it’s was too later to bring them back to life and there’s nothing you can do about it. In some cases maybe I’ll consider it. For instance if we’re dealing with a sociopath or serial killer, or someone with a serious concerning background where said person was a suspect in multiple missing person cases etc etc.

Basically someone who shouldn’t really be kept in prison where they’re given a roof and three meals a day at the expense of taxpayers money, and then this person is released only to be captured again not too long after being released

1

u/katy405 Sep 25 '22

Convictions are and should be made without a reasonable doubt. I believe the death penalty should be given only when there is no doubt and is a truly heinous crime like Dahmer’s. The death penalty should be given very rarely, when needed to protect society from uncontrollable killers.

1

u/foodie_forever88 Sep 25 '22

I am obviously living under a rock because I never knew how messed up he was until I attempted to watch the show on Netflix. Nearly 2 episodes in and i couldn't continue. I've always opposed the death penalty but monsters like Dahmer are the very few I'd agree deserve it...after a long time of rotting away in prison though, enough time to let them think about what they've done.

1

u/EgoSenatus Sep 25 '22

He can spend the rest of his life giving back to society, at least he can be of some use to humanity, had he not been murdered.

1

u/Tuxedo_Shark_00 Sep 25 '22

Complete isolation and stripped of any human rights, these people should not even be able to speak to guards and not be given any form of medical assistance unless absolutely necessary

1

u/Plastic-Increase5040 Sep 25 '22

I don’t give a shit about violent people free everyone in jail for weed and psychedelics !!!!

1

u/Chrispeedoff Sep 25 '22

Still cheaper on the tax payer to jail him for life , justice is fake and the state should not have the power to decide who lives and who dies no matter how heinous the crime

1

u/Madmanmelvin Sep 25 '22

Oh, is eating people a crime now?

1

u/ultimate_ampersand Sep 25 '22

I'm against the death penalty not because I don't think anyone deserves it, but because I don't think it's worth mistakenly killing innocent people just so we can also kill guilty people.

1

u/flwombat Sep 25 '22

A given criminal could be caught in the act of the most horrific crime possible, in public in front of hundreds of people, and it wouldn’t change my feelings about the policy of the state executing people.

If that policy exists, then the state is going to execute innocent people some of the time. There is no realistic way to prevent it.

I am not ok with executing some number of innocent people, in order to protect our ability to execute the guilty ones. It’s not a good or reasonable trade-off. Much, much better to have zero executions.

1

u/HazelGhost Sep 25 '22

100% deserves it. Not worth the 1% chance (or even 0.1% chance) of killing an innocent person.

1

u/electric_shocks Sep 25 '22

Why would you kill them and save them from sitting in a box being deprived from everything they hold dear.

There's Nazis and there's this brain damaged, privileged idiot psychopath. Nazis would be the first in line and even then I would make them sit in that box to wither away.

1

u/Angel_OfSolitude Sep 25 '22

On the face of it, I'm very pro death penalty. Some people obviously shouldn't be alive. But I do not trust the government to never make the mistake of executing an innocent person.

1

u/frencherfrench Sep 25 '22

The only truly sound argument I’ve heard for the death penalty is when you desert before the enemy in war. The punishment has to be worse than the crime, or you’d have no power to prevent desertion during war. Desertion = 100 percent chance of death if caught. Not deserting = less than 100 percent chance of death.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desertion

It’s only been used once in American military history, but it logically HAS to be a legal option. (Note: this is desertion before the enemy, like throwing down your gun and running away, not leaving your post in St. Louis to watch a ballgame.)

1

u/horriblyefficient Sep 25 '22 edited Sep 25 '22

my problem with the death penalty is not that they use it for crimes that I don't think are extreme enough to deserve it. it's that it's a final, permanent punishment.

20 years after they're convicted and sentenced, it might be discovered that there was a horrible mistake in the DNA testing and the prisoner has no credible links to the murders after all, or someone else might confess to setting them up and there's enough evidence to support the confession, or it might come out that they were intimidated into confessing by the police questioning them. suddenly, it turns out that prisoner was never actually a serial killer! they might have never committed any crimes at all! they need to be released asap!

....... except you've executed them. so you've killed an innocent person because the criminal justice system fucked up.

at least if there's just life imprisonment, not the death penalty, the person can be released and awarded monetary damages for their time in prison. it can't make up for what they've gone through, but it's better than being dead.

if you could guarantee that the forensic technology is perfect and never either throws up incorrect results or has the results be interpreted wrong, that police and other investigators always handle investogations, interrogations etc perfectly and never miss things or make mistakes or act in their own best interests, and that the justice system is free from bias and discrimination and isn't confusing or harder to navigate without money and connections and no one involved at that level misses things or makes mistakes or acts selfishly (including the jury and the media).............. then maybe I'd consider having the death penalty for people who have committed horrific crimes and are definitely never going to be safe to re-enter society. but it would be basically impossible to guarantee that, so I'd rather just take it off the table altogether.

and yes, all this applies to people who do things like dahmer did. it's not like being wrongfully convicted suddenly stops being a possibility when cannibalism is involved. I don't care who he is or what he did, I don't think decisions like "should we abolish the death penalty" should be made based on how likely it is a serial-killing cannibal will turn up.

edit: personally, ethics and realities of the criminal justice system aside, isn't it a bigger punishment for really evil people to take all their power and freedom away but keep them alive? why give them the escape of death?

1

u/Aminar14 Sep 25 '22

Life in prison is worse than death. Death isn't a punishment. It's an escape. In a time and place where a person cannot be imprisoned or contained it was appropriate. At this point we don't have anybody that physically powerful or so smart they can't be held in a prison. (We do have people that wealthy, but that's a seperate issue)

Imprisonment serves two purposes. Containment and rehabilitation(leading to atonement). Death only serves containment. It denies atonement and denies rehabilitation. It does serve as vengeance. But vengeance is not justice despite how often the two are conflated.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 25 '22

It’s not the Dahmers, it’s the people who have been proven innocent later on

1

u/[deleted] Sep 25 '22

For clear-cut cases that have virtually no chance for appeal, I support. For cases that take hundreds of thousands of dollars of court fines and such, I don’t support. It’s more of a financial issue than a moral one. I don’t really care if Jeffrey Dhamer types live or die.

1

u/oasis212 Sep 25 '22

For me I don't believe in sort of afterlife, heaven, hell, reincarnation etc, so I believe death is the end. If people are "punished" with the death penalty it doesn't seem like punishment to me, being in prison for the rest of your life as your family and friends move on and live their lives, as the world forgets about you, that is a more fitting punishment for me.

I'd rather have 100 guilty people rot in prison than have one innocent person be put to death with the death penalty.

1

u/derexorzurmus Sep 25 '22

Im against it because they deserve to rot in a prison cell for the rest of their shitty lives not cheat the system and jist die

1

u/PunchBeard Sep 25 '22

The way I figure it is what does the death penalty really accomplish? It doesn't deter anyone from committing crime. Not really. And compared to life sentences executing someone actually costs more in the long run. And then, in the case of Dahmer specifically but violent criminals in general, you have a resource to look into the mind of evil. If we just killed all the bad people how would we have criminal profiling?

The death penalty operates on pure instinct and emotion rather than logic. You take away your feelings and it doesn't really make any sense because as I said it doesn't really accomplish anything other than making some people happy.

1

u/kta31415 Sep 25 '22

I dislike death. Death penalty causes death. The only argument for death penalty that might convince me is that death penalty prevents people from committing murder, but statistics show that it isn't true.

1

u/drygnfyre Sep 25 '22

I'm against the death penalty in all instances. Doesn't matter what the person did. The fact we've executed innocent people (exonerated after the fact) is enough to convince me to stick to life without parole as the maximum.

1

u/Greninja5097 Sep 25 '22

In those cases, I still think he should just go life. Because then, he’ll just have to fester in the sick, twisted depths of his own mind, slowly delving deeper and deeper into insanity with every day that goes by, until he is a hollow, broken shell of a man, unable to react to anything anymore. Unable to feel anything but the pain.

1

u/stealth_elephant Sep 25 '22

There's no excuse for society to kill someone if there's any other possible option.

1

u/soley_urs Sep 25 '22

They can’t eat more people if they’re locked up the rest of their life. You’d probably prefer to die it’s almost worse a sentence

1

u/Blazerboy420 Sep 25 '22

I’m all for terrible pieces of shit having to rot away in prison. If I knew I was going to die in prison I’d much rather get the death penalty. Can’t let ‘em off that easy can we?

1

u/[deleted] Sep 25 '22

Almost everyone I've talked to who is against the death penalty doesn't dispute that there are crimes people deserve to die for. Issues are more with flaws in the system, and the philosophical issue of one human deciding another deserves death and having to flip that switch.

1

u/tickingkitty Sep 25 '22

It’s not about people like him. It’s about the fact that innocent people have been executed. How many innocent people does it take before it becomes wrong?

It’s also a lot more expensive and not an actual deterrent.

I also had a family member murdered by a serial killer. His execution would have let him off easy imo.

1

u/Noggin-a-Floggin Sep 25 '22

I’m not against the death penalty for Jeffrey Dahmer because someone did it already.

1

u/umopap1sdn Sep 25 '22

What message does it send for the government to kill people who kill people? Look at the data on the effect that capital punishment has on crime—it’s the opposite of what supporters of it expect. Also, capital punishment is more expensive for taxpayers than keeping someone in prison until they die (has to do with all the additional legal work).

1

u/ElleYesMon Sep 25 '22

An eye for an eye…some dumbass would eat his buttonhole.

1

u/Petal_Chatoyance Sep 25 '22

Life imprisonment. Always.

The death penalty exists only as revenge. That is not civilized at all.

Worse, completely innocent people are put to death regularly in places where the death penalty exists - it cannot be helped, because no trial is perfect, no jury is perfect, and no investigation is perfect, and technology improves over time. Even one innocent person being murdered by the state is too many, because death is a act you cannot reverse.

You can let an imprisoned innocent out, but death is forever.

Yes, bad or insane people do bad things. But that is not an excuse to indulge in state-sanctioned vengeance. The rational thing to do is to take dangerous people off the street but not kill them or torture them, because we already know that mistaken convictions happen and we are not perfect enough to always know who is guilty, and who is not.

1

u/Maxsdad53 Sep 25 '22

The thing with Dahmer was that eh was one of the FEW serial killers who, when society said "tell us what makes you tick", was HONESTLY trying to tell psychologists, psychiatrists, forensic experts, serial killer experts, why he did what he did. With no excuses, no deals, no special treatment, he openly worked with professionals who wanted to understand the mind of a mad man. And he was one of the few who society actually LEARNED from, without playing the games that so many serial killers (like Kenneth Bianchi and Angelo Buono, Fred & Rose West, Richard Ramirez, or Ted Bundy) played.

1

u/LoweeLL Sep 25 '22

well, they put him in gen pop, and he got beaten to death.. soo technically a death penalty?

→ More replies

1

u/mmohaje Sep 25 '22

I think the issue people have is that it is the State killing someone. Even if we had an entirely fair, just and efficient justice system at the end of the day it's saying, I'm okay with a government killing someone.

1

u/frothysmile Sep 25 '22

Why are people spouting utility nonsensical reasons on why they are not against the death penalty?

It's a moral issue and quite simple. Murder is wrong. Anything else is a rationalizion for defending the act of murder(self-defense, war, and othe exceptions notwithstanding).

These individuals are incapacitated and are no longer a threat. Hence, if given the death penalty, It is now any type of "run of the the mill" murder and should be treated as such.

Murder is murder no matter if the recepient is of good or bad character.

Quite simple.

1

u/try_____another Sep 25 '22

I’m against it for someone like him because it’s too soft.

The only people I support doing it to are politicians and their mates, and then only to minimise the opportunities anyone else might have for them to get a pardon or otherwise weasel out of their punishment, and assassinating people we can’t get extradited for whatever reason and had to try in absentia.

1

u/One_Entertainment381 Sep 25 '22

I think torture should be implemented for mass shooters as a deterrent because a lot of these sickos aren’t even afraid of prison or death. Give them something worse than either of those to set a precedent.

In reality, I know that would lead to heinous issues in our judicial system so obviously that can’t actually exist sadly

1

u/Realistic_Truck Sep 25 '22

I think prisoners given a life sentence should have the choice after 10 years whether or not to die, but as a form of deterrent no, the death penalty doesn't hit home with people like that.

1

u/SkyeeeMaaa Sep 25 '22

I mean you can suffer wayyy more in life than in death 😳

1

u/Ok_Conference5468 Sep 25 '22

The death penalty is nothing more than the legal application of the famous saying: "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth". A fallacious logic if you think about it, as one kills as a punishment for killing. If you want to create or maintain a society that aims at the simple punishment to alienate people and persuade them from committing crimes, then I think it is more than essential, just look at how it is fallacious in any case, as, for example, looking at the percentage of crime within states that still use the death penalty, are clearly superior to states that have not practiced it for decades if not for centuries. Re-education and reintegration are now only utopias, the state does not invest in this, as it would cost too much and the effort would be too high, this is the problem. And speaking of serial killers like Jeffrey Duhmer, the death penalty would not make sense in any case. What would result from it? Eliminating a "bad apple" as the state wants to paint those people who defy the regulation of the quiet life does not eliminate the problem of crime. And just think that most serial killers cannot be defined as bad people ready to kill for the sheer pleasure of doing it. They are people who have the most disparate mental deviations, to which they succumb, and killing them would not solve anything, as another 30 could be born after the killing of just one. It is a question of trying to protect these people, not leaving them free by continuing to have them killed, but by treating or observing what inside their mind leads them to perform similar gestures. The death penalty is the symbol of an apathetic society, which aims at punishment as the only education. It is not effective, and the vast majority of states that still practice it, such as a rather large percentage of the US, are proof of this.

1

u/UnoriginalUse Sep 25 '22

I'm not against it because it kills people, I'm against it because justice should be compensatory, not punitive. Just let people have guns and kill in self-defense; killing after the fact protects no-one.

1

u/RaysUnderwater Sep 25 '22

It’s not the concept of the death penalty, it’s knowing how easily mistakes can be made even by well meaning people, let alone people with prejudices or other bad intent.

It’s just too much power to give to such a flawed system.

1

u/johnperkins21 Sep 25 '22

Revenge and vengeance aren't the same thing as justice. The death penalty isn't justice, it's vengeance. Also, killing humans is wrong, regardless of the reason. I don't believe in revenge, and I don't accept that killing people is ever the right thing to do.

1

u/OmgItsAlice Sep 25 '22

It’s never been about what-about-ism. It’s about the slippery slope it creates and it’s about the one in x that is later found to be innocent

1

u/IgnisLord Sep 25 '22

Man was just hungry. We ganna start killing people who like snacks a lil too much?

1

u/StarChild413 Sep 25 '22

Many pro-death-penalty people frame it like it's a choice between either victims' families getting to torture the perp to death on pay-per-view with the money going to some charity or the perp getting some therapy, hugs from the victims' families, and then being released to live next door to whichever anti-death-penalty person they're arguing with

1

u/Chameleon777 Sep 25 '22

I'd say make them (and all violent offenders) work virtually every waking hour of their sentence (in cases like Dahmer's, their life). Use the revenue generated to sustain the prison and beyond that to provide some compensation to the families of the victims, or more generally)victims and families of victims of violent crime.

→ More replies

1

u/SOTG_Duncan_Idaho Sep 25 '22

I have no problem with executing certain extreme criminals. I just have a problem with executing people who didn't commit the crime they were accused of.

Unfortunately, you can't do the former without the latter sometimes happening.

1

u/MaggotRhaizen Sep 25 '22

Strong power like that always fall in the wrong hands. No questions asked if it's a scum like Dahmer but think about the innocent people who got penalized too.

1

u/ClaraBow01 Sep 25 '22

What would killing him do? You can’t undo the pain done to the families and his victims. Best to leave him in a cell where he can think about what he’s done for his whole life.

Dahmer was killed by someone on equal footing with him. I’m uncomfortable with the idea of the government determining who is worthy of life, especially when that person cannot defend themselves. Why is the guy who killed Dahmer a murderer for it, but an executioner isn’t a murderer?

1

u/Jessica_Lovegood Sep 25 '22

Easy - murder / the non-consensual taking of life is wrong! Correct? Agreed? So why should a government/state/judge be righteous in taking someone’s life? Two wrongs don’t make a right.

1

u/Jamesbigpeach556 Sep 25 '22

There are few who are that insane for condemning all to Death but a slower death is dying each day in jail

1

u/qqqrrrs_ Sep 25 '22

So murdering a person is less bad than the act of eating the dead body afterwards?

1

u/rcsheets Sep 25 '22

Yes, I still think killing people is wrong, even if those people literally ate people or literally did whatever other awful thing you choose next as an extreme example. If we've successfully stopped them from doing the awful thing they did, then we don't need to kill them.

1

u/Complex-Soup-1867 Sep 25 '22

Really?! He got beaten to death, kind of a moot point, but I'm all for that kind of punishment. Especially, people like Richard Huckle, who got hundred+ years?! He was tortured and killed by two guys. I think they need to change the system and then decide who to put to death.

1

u/ranjitzu Sep 25 '22

If there was a way to 100% guarantee the validity of a conviction then for people like dahmer I would be all for the death penalty in those kinds of cases

The problem is that there is no way to 100% guarantee the validity of a conviction.

As long as there exists the possibility of police tampering, negligence, evidence contamination etc, then there may be cases where you sentence a person to death who is innocent.

And it isnt a small chance. Miscarriages of justice happen all of the time.

The question is, would you kill those innocent people in order to get the monsters too? I wouldnt. Id rather just chuck them in jail and forget about them.

Let their lives be long and miserable, and let innocent victims of a miscarridges of justice live and have the opportunity to one day - hopefully - clear their name.

Many people against the death penalty arent against killing monsters. Theyre against the potential collateral.

1

u/NorCalHermitage Sep 25 '22

I'm against it because I don't trust our "justice" system, not because I see it as inherently immoral. If lawyers were more interested in justice than in winning, I might have a different opinion.

1

u/Shastaismybaby Sep 25 '22

He was mentally ill.

1

u/SJammie Sep 25 '22

In theory, I believe there's a time and place for the death penalty.

In reality, I don't trust governments/legal systems. You can't take back executing the wrong person. You can't take back years in prison, either, but it's slightly less final and irrevocable as death.

1

u/MercyMachine Sep 25 '22

You don't build the justice system around statistical anomalies

1

u/adragonthatsgay Sep 25 '22

"Let's kill this person to show everyone else that killing people is wrong!"

1

u/Upset-Sea6029 Sep 25 '22

I'm conflicted - guys like Dahmer or the Green River guy, who have obvious mental issues, are better kept alive to be studied, in order to better understand what made them tick. On the other hand, common criminals who murder a family to steal money for drugs or whatever have no reason to continue using oxygen.

1

u/begemot752 Sep 25 '22

Even if its Dahmer or anyone, death penalty makes everyone a murderer. Its that one innocent executed person and everyone is now a participant in that murder.