Submitted 15 hours ago by WongKaKui@piefed.ca to [deleted]
So killing is not okay except when its internet-approved vigilantism?
Example: “Polititian commutes death sentences” Lemmy be like “good”, but then when “Politician condemns assassination” Lemmy have a problem with condeming political violence?
(Like Gavin Newsom commutes all death row immates in California vs when Democratic polititians condemned Luigi Mangione)
Or are these different groups of Lemmings?
Because an individual person is different from a nation state.
Violence in the myth logic of states is something i as a subject surrender to the state, so that whatever the state as representative of the people decides can be accomplished, so even just from that very classic liberal perspective there should be oversight and curtailments over the use of violence by the state. Nominally courts fill this role but even there it’s not hard to find a good argument that a justice system should never be allowed to kill, or make any irreversible decision.
Now I don’t really believe in the Mythos of nation states very much. I do however belive that powerful people within nation states governments as well as surrounding them can be quite bad for the majority of humanity.
Simpler and probably commo selfish reasoning here on lemmy : "I can see myself on death row but not as Luigis target. "
Luigi rules, death penalty is stupid.
goomba/galoomba meme
Or are these different groups of Lemmings?
It’s the same group of people.
They like to see certain people they don’t like murdered. All other people outside of that group, regardless of how heinous of a crime they committed, should not serve their sentence.
Cricket@lemmy.zip 14 hours ago
First, it could be very well be different people. We’re at what, 50k monthly active users now? There will be some different opinions even among a small group of people.
Second, the two positions can be compatible. For example, I’m very against the death penalty, but the thought has crossed my mind that when someone is convicted of a brutal murder, for example, and receives the death penalty, the state shouldn’t be allowed to kill the convict, but the relatives, friends, or loved ones of the victim should have the option to do so legally if they wish to. I know, it’s harsh, but I think that this would be more logical than the current system. The loved ones of the victim would have both a better motive to kill the convict AND also the added burden of considering the negative effects to themselves of following through with that decision.