Capital punishment remains controversial in the US, with critics warning of innocent people being put on death row.

The administration of United States President Donald Trump has announced plans to expand the use of the federal death penalty, including through the deployment of firing squads.

The announcement on Friday was part of a policy document issued by the Department of Justice, setting out the legal argument for various methods of execution.

It touted steps for “restoring and strengthening” the death penalty as integral to the pursuit of justice.

“The Department of Justice acted to restore its solemn duty to seek, obtain, and implement lawful capital sentences — clearing the way for the Department to carry out executions once death-sentenced inmates have exhausted their appeals,” the Justice Department said in a news release.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
    112·
    1 day ago

    …

    Yes…

    Any discussion on an ethical way to do something, is first predicted on the thing happening.

    There’s an ethical way to cut aomeone’s leg off, that doesn’t mean we should cut Bob’s leg off, it doesn’t even mean we should cut anyone’s leg off under any circumstances.

    Just that if we were going to do something, there are ways to do that ethically.

    People really don’t learn this shit anymore?

    • sulfidedisburseangledafternoontipper@piefed.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      32·
      22 hours ago

      This argument is specious. It implies that there’s an ethical way to engage in any imaginable act and ignores the possibility of the existence of acts which may never be ethical under any circumstance. This isn’t a question of whether someone has “learned this shit.” You’ve created a tautology re: the existence of an ethical means to all ends. One doesn’t need to accept Kant’s Categorical Imperative to believe that some acts can never be ethical.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
        12·
        20 hours ago

        ignores the possibility of the existence of acts which may never be ethical under any circumstance.

        Name 1, and I bet I can justify it ethically.

        Like, “if you don’t do ____, then superman blows up the sun” is the obvious one, but depending on what you say, I can dial back some.

        • nomy@lemmy.zipEnglish
          1·
          8 hours ago

          Name 1, and I bet I can justify it ethically.

          Trump fucks kids, go.

    • nwtreeoctopus@sh.itjust.works
      1·
      23 hours ago

      On the other hand, there’re good, ethical reasons to cut off Bob’s leg sometimes. If you hold the view that there’s never an ethical reason for the state to execute someone, then by that definition all those killings are just some varied degrees of unethical.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
        12·
        23 hours ago

        A prisoner is suffering and wants to die, their life is a constant pain and keeping them in prison until they die would be torture…

        Youd make them suffer for years to only die in prison later?

        I guess everyone has different ethical lines…

        • nwtreeoctopus@sh.itjust.works
          2·
          23 hours ago

          First, I didn’t make the argument.

          Second, I think most people could draw a line between allowing a suffering prisoner to choose death and forcing it on them.

          Third, that assumes that there’s an ethical argument for life imprisonment.