Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑
Tue Aug 20, 2019 5:47 am
And you're entitled to that opinion. (I thought that way once, too.) But the SJWs at WEIT consistently strawman the pro death penalty argument, while excoriating and slandering any who support it. Also, forced to venture outside their ideological groupthink bubble for the first time, they are shockingly bad at defending their theses.
mordacious1 wrote: ↑
I used to, also. I bought the Left’s argument that life without parole is a worse punishment than execution. But, as usual, they lied. They really didn’t want to lock them up forever, they wanted to let them go:
https://www.newyorkupstate.com/news/201 ... _york.html
That’s just from a four month period in 2016 in NY State.
All SJW public policy is grounded on the false concept that humans are, if not inherently good by nature, then at least tabula rasa
thus ever malleable/redeemable. The current rage among the far left now is 'restorative justice', whereby criminals, even sadistic rapists and murderers, meet with their victims (or surviving family members), listen to how much their crime hurt them, and PAFF! experience a damascene moment, renounce crime, and do community service like picking litter as recompense. It's completely batshit crazy.
The far left (whatever that is, perhaps SJW left) doesn't really know what they want. They have little contact with the real world. What opinion they have on the situation "one the ground" is given to them by NPR and academia. So we have bleeding heart liberals who think psychopathic serial killers can be redeemed thru empathy, but also that a hapless drunken juveniles like Brock Turner should be raped in incarceration for ten years to life. The SJW left has no conception of what actual justice looks like. Confront them on this and they look at you with a blank stare, or the online equivalent.
_I_ do believe in redemption and rehabilitation. The Shawshank example, obviously dramatic, is true. People do change. People are sucked into situations were murder happens, and they are not entirely beyond redemption. Shit happens, and it has little to do with Jerry's--irrelevant to my mind--ideas on free will determinism. To relegate all murderers to lifetime incarceration is wrongheaded, to my mind. I know many people disagree, and I know that I might disagree too, if a loved one was taken.
That being said, there are some people who, barring execution, should be incarcerated for life. There really are people beyond redemption, and we shouldn't bother trying. That doesn't mean we should torture them with inhumane accommodations. You don't torture an animal that kills (though often they're put down); you shouldn't torture a human who kills. This distinction about knowing right from wrong is ultimately a religious qualification. I'm not entirely sure some murderers don't "think" they're doing the right thing, to them.
The trick is separating the two, those who can and can't be redeemed.