Yes, actually. It is a lot less meally mouthed than the "i don't support the death penalty but won't mind when this guy gets it" b.s. several posters (including you) stated previously.
It's entirely possible to oppose the death penalty as an institution because of its chance to kill innocents, while not having a single qualm about - as long as it's legal - it being applied to mass murderers where there is zero doubt about their guilt.
I believe executing killers is completely morally justifiable, yet I'd be happy if it went away simply because I don't trust the states to apply it, personally.
That's at least somewhat reasonable. the rub is that prohibition means in all cases, no matter how henious and deserving, requires telling victims' families their loved one's kileer will live out his days.
I oppose the death penalty because of the act itself, not its consequence. I don't think that the State has the right to take a human being's life. That doesn't mean I actively wish criminals to continue living. I wouldn't shed a tear for Roof if he was sentenced to death, just like I wouldn't shed a tear if he was struck by lightning or hanged himself in his cell. I am completely indifferent to his fate. It's only the act of killing I oppose.
Is that clear enough for you?
Clearly pussyfooted. If you oppose the death penalty you oppose it just as strongly against the Dylann Roofs of the world as the construct of the framed victim of race and privilege, etc.
That's not what I said. Learn to read.
You, and numerous others in this thread, claim to adamently oppose the death penalty as barbaric, perpetuating violence, etc., but are at heart basically ok with him eventually being executed. That is not only an implicit admission that in some truly henious cases like this capital punishment is arguably appropriate , but more then a tad hypocritical.
i'm not ok with it. i don't think antonio said he was either.
Poll
