Do You Support The Death Penalty For Luigi Mangione? (1 Viewer)

[multivita-man]

So being put to death when innocent is bad locking him up for life and in with the rapists, etc, when innocent... is fine?.

Prisons don't have to be violent.

 

[Felis Leo]

Link: Federal prosecutors to seek death penalty for Luigi Mangione in UnitedHealthcare CEO’s killing

NEW YORK (AP) — U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said Tuesday that she has directed prosecutors to seek the death penalty against Luigi Mangione in the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, following through on the president’s campaign promise to vigorously pursue capital punishment...

Good.

No. If he did indeed do it, the person he killed had it coming.

 

[multivita-man]

No. If he did indeed do it, the person he killed had it coming.

Not necessarily.

 

[Felis Leo]

I dont see what luigi did as any more evil, probably less evil than what that ceo did.

Hear, hear.

And damn, it is good to have you back, BomberFox.

 

[Felis Leo]

Not necessarily.

Well from a legal perspective, of course not. Being a private healthcare insurance executive is a respectable, legal job. Just like two centuries ago, being a slave trader was a respectable legal profession. Killing either person, the health insurance CEO or the slave trader just for doing their job would have been both illegal and morally heinous.

I am saying from a moral perspective, Brian Johnson was an banally evil man whose death made the world a slightly better place just like the murder of a slave trader two centuries ago would have. While I believe Luigi Mangioni should be punished for taking the law into his own hands, I cannot be made to weep the passing of the head of a literal privatized death panel, or say that Mr. Mangioni deserves to die for killing him.

 

[The Mark]

I don't support the death penalty.

If you support it "for" some people but not "for" others, your opinion is unprincipled.


Note: this is different than saying that someone in some grand moral or karmic sense "deserves" to have a thing(s) happen to them. This is about the government taking a person's life in a mechnized manner.

Example:

Certain persons, in my opinion, deserve death.

But I don't want my government having the power to kill them.

 

[Bodi]

Prisons don't have to be violent.

But they are... spend some time in one and see for yourself.


.

 

[tharock220]

So being put to death when innocent is bad locking him up for life and in with the rapists, etc, when innocent... is fine?


.

Punishing an innocent person is among the worst things that can happen anywhere. Punishing an innocnet person in a manner that's permanent might just be the worst.

 

[Felis Leo]

But they are... spend some time in one and see for yourself..

Well, yeah. They are. Making prisons deliberately horrible to the point of inhumanity should be done away with in the same way we should deliberately do away with the private health insurance industry model of paying for healthcare.

 

[CLAX1911]

By it's very nature, the death penalty is a cruel and unusual punishment.

Punishment should fit the crime. Isn't life in prison cruel and unusual or is that okay?

 

[CLAX1911]

Well, yeah. They are. Making prisons deliberately horrible to the point of inhumanity should be done away with in the same way we should deliberately do away with the private health insurance industry model of paying for healthcare.

I agree with you prisons should be a place of reform not punishment. For every pedophile and murderer we walk away and desire the worst things to happen to them there is 30 people who are serving out a two-year sentence for marijuana or theft. And if you lock these people away with animals that brutalize them they will come out brutal.

I think the reason why we don't do this is complex. First their prisons people don't want to spend money on prisons and making life better for people who committed crimes that's a hard sell. It should then instead be sold as reform so that when these people get out they're more in line with what is social and legally acceptable. Then we have the problem of private prisons. Companies that contract with these private prisons make the most money when it's overcrowded. Overcrowding makes it hard to supervise and makes it hard to make sure the basic necessities are met let alone things like reform.

You think of the system a lot differently and someone you care about is put in it. Even if they did a crime and deserves to pay a debt to society.

And I stand by the notion that we should be judged on how we treat the least of us.

 

[multivita-man]

Well from a legal perspective, of course not. Being a private healthcare insurance executive is a respectable, legal job. Just like two centuries ago, being a slave trader was a respectable legal profession. Killing either person, the health insurance CEO or the slave trader just for doing their job would have been both illegal and morally heinous.

I am saying from a moral perspective, Brian Johnson was an banally evil man whose death made the world a slightly better place just like the murder of a slave trader two centuries ago would have. While I believe Luigi Mangioni should be punished for taking the law into his own hands, I cannot be made to weep the passing of the head of a literal privatized death panel, or say that Mr. Mangioni deserves to die for killing him.

I understand what you're saying and probably even agree on some philosophical level (or can be easily persuaded to).

Sure, Johnson made decisions that effectively killed people on a regular basis. That's what shareholders required that he do for the good of the corporate person. Anyone who has healthcre in their portfolio is investing in actuarial life/death decision-making every day.

The real moral crime is that he never should have had the power (or the freedom, if you prefer) to make those kinds of decisions in the first place. It's the rot of our economic and political system that allows the commercialization of things that shouldn't be commercialized, or they should at least be heavily boxed in by regulation if they are.

 

[Cordelier]

Punishment should fit the crime. Isn't life in prison cruel and unusual or is that okay?

If punishment fit the crime, every murder case would be a capital one. You may like that - it certainly wouldn't make the death penalty unusual - but it doesn't do much for the people who would have ended up being exonerated.

So what do we do instead? We make special exceptions for cases we deem especially heinous - we put restrictions on how they are sentenced and all the rest. But doing all of that in itself makes capital punishment unusual.

Judging from all of that, I'd say life imprisonment is the better alternative. The punishment fits the crime, wrongly convicted people have the possibility of exoneration, and it certainly isn't unusual.

 

[Cordelier]

No. If he did indeed do it, the person he killed had it coming.

If you kill a Mafia Don, you're still a murderer, aren't you?

 

[OrphanSlug]

I've struggled with the death penalty in a general sense anyway, not sure I find enough argument to apply it to Mangione.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

The death penalty and pardons are hypocritical to the rule of law.

 

[Slartibartfast]

I challenge people who say never to anything, including death penalty.
There are monster among us. True monsters. They do not deserve to live rather comfortably in a prison.
I good example - a man burned a girlfriends small child in front of her to get her back for leaving him.
Set the child on fire.
You want him to play cards, find friends and be warm when it is cold, and never work a day in his life?
Really?

It is sufficient that they are in prison and the harm is removed from society if they cannot be reformed and reintegrated. The idea of punishment is a bit silly and backward.

 

[cpwill]

I believe the death penalty is often justified, but oppose it's application, so, no.

 

[pragmatic]

How about Luigi Mangione is given a choice? Either the death penalty or life in an isolated cell forever?

And which ever one he chooses....he gets the other one.


(Really, really don't like that guy.)

..

 

[Bodi]

Well, yeah. They are. Making prisons deliberately horrible to the point of inhumanity should be done away with in the same way we should deliberately do away with the private health insurance industry model of paying for healthcare.

Totally agree with you...

 

[CLAX1911]

If punishment fit the crime, every murder case would be a capital one.

Why would every murder case be a capital murder

You may like that - it certainly wouldn't make the death penalty unusual - but it doesn't do much for the people who would have ended up being exonerated.

If you take their life away or you take their life away what difference does it make? If it takes 30 years to exonerate them you can't give them the 30 years back

So what do we do instead? We make special exceptions for cases we deem especially heinous -

We do it's called a capital murder charge. Not all murders are capital murders.

we put restrictions on how they are sentenced and all the rest. But doing all of that in itself makes capital punishment unusual.

So?

Judging from all of that, I'd say life imprisonment is the better alternative. The punishment fits the crime, wrongly convicted people have the possibility of exoneration, and it certainly isn't unusual.

So take their life away or take their life away I don't see the difference.

 

[Mika-El]

I don’t support the death penalty for anybody

I am Canadian. Its a tough one. I am mostly opposed. I do honestly Citizen waver when it comes to terrorists where the proof is 100%. I waver though. I that is the one area..or serial killers who voluntarily consent to it. I am a former lawyer and law prof. I know the problems with evidence. I am just being honest. Its not an easy one. In the specific case above, I do not support the death penalty.

 

[Mika-El]

I believe the death penalty is often justified, but oppose it's application, so, no.

I like your answer. The lawyer in me knows how problematic evidence is so in principle me no like. However when it comes to repeat serial killers and terrorists I really wonder. I think though push comes to shove I have to defer to your words. On the other hand in a battlefield or incident with terrorists I am not expecting soldiers or police to do anything but kill them and saving lives and not risking their own if I can say that.

 

[Citizen]

I am Canadian. Its a tough one. I am mostly opposed. I do honestly Citizen waver when it comes to terrorists where the proof is 100%. I waver though. I that is the one area..or serial killers who voluntarily consent to it. I am a former lawyer and law prof. I know the problems with evidence. I am just being honest. Its not an easy one. In the specific case above, I do not support the death penalty.

You have to ask yourself, what is the purpose of the death penalty? Is it to eliminate terrible people from the face of the earth or for revenge

 

[bomberfox]

This brought to light the question of who is a murderer and who isnt in the eyes of the law. I saw links to a potential law with Luigi’s name on it and was shocked at the boldness of it. A better world is possible, very possible but sometimes those only come via ways that wrenches our guts. I wish that healthcare can be fixed peacefully but like with slave masters health insurance CEOs will hold onto their ill gotten gains by any means necessary.