Summary
President Joe Biden commuted the sentences of 37 federal death row inmates to life without parole, sparing all but three convicted of high-profile mass killings.
Biden framed the decision as a moral stance against federal executions, citing his legal background and belief in the dignity of human life.
Donald Trump criticized the move as senseless, vowing to reinstate the death penalty.
Reactions were mixed: some victims’ families condemned Biden, while others supported his decision. Human rights groups praised it as a significant step against capital punishment.
Is trump cryingon social media about how he doesn’t get to kill 37 people on Christmas eve ?
Nice move by sleepy joe i guess
Yes, but both sides.
Well, Kamala had that laugh, so…
“The economy!”
-People who spent $41 billion three weeks later.
Good conservative Christian’s LOVE killing!
Nothing says “pro life” like whining about not being able to murder someone.
While I’m overall glad about this, leaving 3 unpardoned inmates really corrupts the “moral stance against federal executions” justification and makes it seem like he is in favor of capital punishment but only for people he thinks deserve it. It also makes it seem like he believes it’s his decision to decide who gets to live and that rubs me the wrong way.
Even the most die-hard anti-death-penalty believer has their limits. It may take Hitler-level atrocities to get there, or maybe even worse. But everyone has their own line in the sand where even they will say “If there was ever a case in favor of the death penalty, this is that case.” That line is in a completely different place for everybody.
It also makes it seem like he believes it’s his decision to decide who gets to live and that rubs me the wrong way.
Since the President has final pardon power, he actually does get to decide who gets to live. It’s a power granted to him by the Constitution.
Yep I’m anti-death penalty, the 3 that didn’t get pardoned should probably just live the rest of their lives in prison. But I’m not going to shed any tears for them.
He didn’t pardon the others, he commuted their sentences to life in prison. Of note, the 3 civilians left are terrorists who committed mass murder and were caught red handed. There are also 4 people on military death row who remain. One is also a mass murdering terrorist; one committed literal treason, attacking his own unit in the middle of the night overseas; one is a serial killer/rapist; and one took three trials over 4 decades to convict of a group murder.
They should probably commute his sentence too…
Yeah sorry that’s what I meant, long day at work. no sympathy for the people on death row, either way they should not be allowed back into normal society.
I understand that and, if you ask me, those 3 guys are pos. My problem is that he said he did it to take a moral stance against death penalty. You can’t do that and go “except for these 3 cases”.
Right, but again…everybody has that point where they say “…except that case”. You and Biden just disagree on where that line is. Even the Pope is eventually going to look at someone who committed some heinous crimes and say “Dude, even the Bible says that shit ain’t cool…”
But not everybody is making a statement about morality. He’s purportedly saying “capital punishment is bad and we should get rid of it”. If you make exceptions, all you’re saying is that you’re in favor of keeping it around for really bad people, which is exactly where they are now.
People make exceptions for things they believe in all the time. Religion is a prime example; show me any established religion, and I’ll show you a few dozen beliefs associated with that religion that 99.9% of worshippers conveniently ignore. That doesn’t mean they don’t believe. That just means they have limits.
show me any established religion, and I’ll show you a few dozen beliefs associated with that religion that 99.9% of worshippers conveniently ignore
Zoroastrianism.
Zoroastrianism.
I’d be willing to bet that if you could even find someone practicing the religion, they’re not praying several times a day in a fire temple.
I’m not sure that’s true. Some people legitimately stop at life in prison and always oppose the death penalty.
I’m one of those. Capital punishment is obsolete in my opinion, since we no longer need to execute people to ensure that they don’t present danger to the civilized population in the future.
I’m confident. Granted, for some people that red line may require atrocities at or above Hitler levels. It may require atrocities that are comically unrealistic. But it’s there. Put up someone who killed a proverbial busload of school children. If that isn’t enough, two. “Yeah, I killed them all, and I raped them first, and I’ll do the same again if I ever escape.”. Someone’s gonna say “Yeah, OK, stick the needle in his arm”, just because they don’t want to take the .000001% chance that he actually does escape.
An extreme example, yes, but I’m sure you get the idea. Everybody’s got a breaking point.
Again, I don’t know if that’s true. People seem to have very strange absolute moral ideas sometimes.
That doesn’t necessarily mean their beliefs are absolute. It just means that the red line needed to shake those believes has yet to be found.
Nope. The most die hard, anti death penalty believer has no limits and literally says “we do not have the right to take anyone’s life, even if they are Hitler. In fact it would be better for society if we got to try to rehabilitate Hitler”.
And I agree with them.People can downvote you but aren’t even thinking it out. Hitler right now is still a projected person for the far-right nazi movement and is brought up constantly. What if he had been imprisoned and actually got mental health care that doesn’t really exist in most prison populations currently (globally that is). If you had a senior Hitler, with life imprisonment, painting fields of flowers with jewish and little blonde/blond kids running around, it would be a totally different outcome in this day and age.
To be possible though the prison system would need completely reworked. In our current system I don’t think it would have the same outcome (since our system has a different purpose than rehabilitate currently). I also think people shouldn’t be able to communicate as effectively with the outside world without extra censorship (that whole no harm to society thing, can still happen if they’re voicing action or calls to violence, happens still currently.).
A world leader like the president is deciding on deaths every single day. You are right to think it’s unsavory, but it certainly isn’t unique to this pardoning.
That may be true but singling out 3 people who are currently harmless and saying “you get to die” feels somehow different.
He probably did that the day before and the day after.
Devil’s advocate: do the last 3 deserve it? Are they unsafe to other inmates and also not possible candidates for rehabilitation and release to society?
If yes… Welp.
That’s the point of taking a “moral stance against federal executions”, though — nobody deserves it.
Yeah… Most people don’t. Some do.
well, regardless whether he or anyone believes it or not, it quite literally was his decision to make
Pretty clear donvict knows his qon “pro-life” fanbase is bloodthirsty, and they demand sacrifices.
Yea, this group largely believes an execution sends them to hell sooner to suffer more. As someone who isn’t religious, I’d rather they waste away in jail, as that is much more a punishment than a quick death.
Prison should be rehabilatative, not punitive
Prison is an sentence, thus a form of punishment, as well as a rehabilitation procedure, as well as mean of protection of the public.
Death sentence on the other hand, is a moronic form of punishment as well as ineffective,because it doesn’t prevent the crimes themselves
Prison is an sentence, thus a form of punishment, as well as a rehabilitation procedure, as well as mean of protection of the public.
Not in the United States, it isn’t. The system isn’t designed to rehabilitate offenders; it’s designed to encourage recidivism:
- Background and criminal record checks for jobs outside of high security or confidentiality fields.
- Background check for renting housing post release.
- Anti-homelessness and loitering laws.
- In some states where it hasn’t yet been banned, criminals may have to pay back the prison as part of parole conditions.
But, why would any civilized country allow that to happen? Because the 13th amendment has an exemption for criminals serving their punishment. Prisons can use inmates for mass labor and contracting while paying them a fraction of the value they are producing, generating profit.
Neither Orwell nor Bradbury nor Vonnegut could have come up with anything so bizarre and upside down as to have a complete criminal and felon pretend that he cares about law and order.
It’s odd when you think about it. Republicans don’t want abortion but whole heartedly support executions. Democrats are against executions but whole heartedly support abortion. Welcome to America.
Conservatives aren’t anti-murder, they are pro-suffering.
They are anti-abortion, because they don’t ever get a chance to make the fetus suffer. And golly, the mother barely gets dehumanized at all.
Just think about all the in suffering that fetus skipped by not getting a disease that is easily preventable with a vaccination, and also, it will never know the hell of getting sick from drinking raw milk.
The State should not be allowed to punish someone by killing them. Capital punishment is merely revenge with the government acting as the hitman. There’s no way to prevent an innocent person from being accidentally murdered. And those 40 people are proof that it doesn’t act as an effective deterrent.
It’s a barbaric practice and we need to end it.
Yes and No.
I agree completely in a fallible system these executions ought never exist.
However creating a framework of rules with outcomes and holding all accountable to them is the most morally / ethically benign thing we do as humans.
The state is the only ethical executor of these decisions.
BUT the system is fallible and made up of fallible people and isn’t always steered for the moral / ethical and as such your last sentence is even more truthful than even you meant it.
I don’t think one should be executed if their moral framework doesn’t align with the laws created by the state.
I understand why we can’t do this today, but I would much prefer the exile method to execution.
One of the three he didn’t pardon was Dylann Roof. I thought they fried his ass already, had no idea he was still alive.
I did wonder why the three that weren’t spared were left to die… and I still kinda do.
Also I’m kinda surprised Trump didn’t pardon Dylann Roof.
It’s because the entire party got justifiably shellacked in the press and court of public opinion for pardoning one of the kids for cash judges. This happened where I live and I remember the outrage over the absurdly light sentences they recieved to begin with, clemency on top was just too much for many of us to stomach.
Some people really don’t deserve second chance or eleventh hour stay.
I know of onlt one western country with death penalty: Belarus. And I’m pretty sure as soon as potato dictator dies, it will be abolished.
Provided that microdick Vlad doesn’t pull a Ukraine on the country for trying to have democracy, and entering the EU and NATO
Biden: Grants clemency indiscriminately for 1,500 people Public: Why did you let the Cash for Kids woman free Biden: Commutes death sentences selectively Public: Who made you judge, jury and executioner?
Good. The more he cries the better
His incompetence killed hundreds of thousands his first term. This time he was hoping for a more direct approach. Biden spoiled his murderous fun.
We could have had colosseum executions where inmates fight to the death, hosted by Dana White and the UFC. But no, old man Biden has to ruin the fun.
View these through the lens of each politician acting in their personal self-interest (which both of them have thoroughly demonstrated to be their only priority). What do they care one way or the other? This is political theater where they’re playing with the lives of the people in question.
Yes, I also agree that the president that commuted many death sentences is exactly the same as the president wanting to execute all of the prisoners
No, you’re right, fuck me for saying that thing that I didn’t even say. Your made-the-fuck-up interpretation of my comment disproves anything I have to say. This is a really healthy discourse we’re having and it’s not a glaring red flag that you’re so completely full of shit that you can’t even have a conversation with the person in front of you, you have to invent a fictional version of them to argue with.
Can you reiterate what you were trying to say then? To me, these quotes sound reductive but perhaps there’s nuance I’m overlooking:
each politician acting in their personal self-interest
both of them have thoroughly demonstrated to be their only priority
This is political theater where they’re playing with the lives of the people in question.
How are they “reductive”? They’re not purporting to be an exhaustive explanation. STOP TRYING TO INFER MEANING THAT ISN’T THERE.
In theory, the death penalty makes some sense. It’s a right the government reserves for itself (violence) and I think in some contexts it makes sense to be on the table. In practice, it’s more expensive than a life sentence, and it’s a blunt and racist tool to maintain unjust social and state power.
I wish every governor and president commuted 95% of death penalty situations. It’s a major injustice that most executions were carried out, even for those who belief it’s something the government should be doing.
Also, you’re very hardly ever 100% sure someone deserves to die. It’s morally much better to not kill just in case - and there’s been tons of cases where new evidence, like DNA, has exonerated convicted prisoners. You might be keeping someone fed and warm who didn’t deserve it, but personally I’d rather err on the side of humanity.
Like Gandalf said,
“Many that live deserve death, and some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.”
I don’t get it. The death penalty doesn’t seem to deter people from committing heinous crimes. The practice seems more for the families who want closure, but morally we should be above killing unnecessarily. Whether someone is jailed for life in solitary or sentenced to death does not change the fact that they will never be able to harm another member of society.
And don’t get me wrong, if someone kills a loved one I will want them dead, but my emotions should not drive taxpayer funded punishment.
Putting aside some of the practical issues for a moment…
- that legal process makes executions more expensive than a life sentenc
- it’s a tremendous power for governments to have and rife for corruption or making permanent mistakes.
Why should society be obligated to suppord, and securely house people who should never be allowed back into society?
Maybe instead we could put those resources towards restoring the lives of the victims instead of the punishment of the sentenced?
A punitive system leaves the victims out cold where the only solace they can hope for is that the person responsible is punished appropriately.
A better one might provide mental/physical healthcare, social support, and an option for a direct role in the reconciliation process for the victim and their immediate family/household.
I just don’t see how “justice” can be achieved when everyone has paid in and all we get for it is someone locked in a cell or murdered while the people they wronged haven’t seen an ounce of support.
