Because the state has prisons, and the population doesnt

See Goomba Fallacy:

A logical fallacy that occurs when someone sees contradictory opinions expressed by members of a group and mistakenly believes that those people are being hypocritical, when in reality those contradictory opinions were expressed by separate individuals

Edit: more expo dump

I think it comes down to those that get the death penalty are already incarcerated, they can no longer cause harm even if they were kept alive.

Those that people want to get luigi’d are often those of the 1% that seem to be impossible to punish in a traditional sense and rarely if ever get put in prison, so they continue to be out in public able to continue to cause harm.

its not only in lemmy/piefed, its on every social media luigi was on.

People condemned to the death penalty are generally not existential threats to humanity. It’s safe to simply keep them where they can do no harm.

Financially obese parasites, on the other hand, are existential threats to humanity, so, while the death penalty is morally abhorrent, they must be put down to ensure the survival of civilization and the human race as a whole.

Forced to choose between two bad options (murder or extinction), we can only choose the less abhorrent one.

Of course, though, this obligation doesn’t justify or absolve the crime, it just makes it necessary, an existential imperative. Whoever commits it should still face justice.

(In Luigi’s case specifically, he shouldn’t be absolved because his alleged victim was objectively a cancer on society and it’s death made the world slightly less worst, but because there’s a reasonable doubt that the evidence against him might have been fabricated.)

The government is untrustworthy for making such decisions, has corrupt motivations and is very frequently completely wrong, and typically implements such penalties with unnecessarily cruel, ineffective and sadistic methods.

On the other hand, becoming so homicidally angry at capitalist robber-barons that you feel compelled to take lethal action against them is a perfectly justified and almost universally understandable situation that anyone who lives in said capitalist system has probably already fantasized about on occasion.

there is no such consensus. nice try tho.

The prosecutors won’t enforce the laws against them, and the courts wouldn’t accept it if they did.

Seems pretty straightforward to me.

This post reads like an llm agent trying to play human. Probably not that idk. But over 50% of engagement is from chatbots now across social media.

People against death penalty¹ think the state shouldn’t be given the right to murder people. That’s it.

These people want the system to work, without the need of murdering anyone, let that be by the state or the people.

The very same people agreeing that a murder was beneficial for the system and the people doesn’t contradict that. It’s simply a symptom of the system being broken and the state not doing enough to fix it for the people.

Legal institutions can jail people for life, but vigilantes can’t. Kidnapping a CEO and ethically keeping him alive in a private blacksite for life (food, entertainment, medical care (ironically)) is cost prohibitive and also much harder to pull off.

You need the death penalty and mob justice for people who are above the law.

One of the reasons a justice system exists is to keep people from taking it into their own hands which leads to endless revenge/honor killings and feuds that last forever. It can also be less harsh, at least in some ways, then what the aggrieved may do on their own. However, when the justice system refuses to apply justice, expect people to start taking things into their own hands. This can manifest in plenty of ways (jury nullification, no witnesses seeing anything somehow, etc.) and has happened many times over the years.

If people see great harm being done with no justice, they may take things into their own hands. There aren’t a lot of ways that are actually going to make a difference that an individual can do (a sociopath isn’t going to give a shit about a latter or petition). If the justice system will not do good by the people, their means are limited as they cannot inflict the type of legal and financial pain a justice system can. As such, they turn to the only thing they know might work.

I believe we should abolish the death penalty. Half of me would really like to keep it for those in positions of power over others who abuse that (police, politicians, abusive caregivers, etc.), especially if there’s a chance they could get back out, but it’s better to be rid of it entirely. That doesn’t mean I’m not going to cheer if an arms dealer is fed to a woodchipper or those responsible for immense pain and suffering and death of others are no more when the justice system does not deliver justice.

He is the natural reaction to untenable situations. We don’t want to become plumbers, we want material conditions to be improved so that we do not feel the need to follow his example.

His life was fucked before the Healthcare CEO took a long nap. Now thr best he can hope for is an aquittal and a book deal.

We want people to have access to Healthcare so we don’t feel the need to put on a plumber hat.

Typing is one thing.

But how many Lemmy users would Green Mario, IRL, if they were put in his shoes?

Statistically, so far, the answer is: very few.

Because there’s a huge difference between killing a convicted criminal as a “deterence” to other criminals, and killing a tyrant to make them stop hurting people en masse.