> For nearly two years, no one but Gonzales knew what happened to Bridget (Townsend). One day while he was serving a life sentence for the rape and kidnapping of another woman, Gonzales decided to confess to killing Bridget, leading authorities to her remains in a field in Bandera, a small town 40 miles northwest of San Antonio.
> (Townsend's Mother) says she didn’t even have a body to bury on Oct. 16, 2002 because Gonzales "wanted to see her body decay.”
Amazing this took 22 years.
[It's from the link in the article to the article about the victim and her mother specifically.](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/06/25/bridget-townsend-ramiro-gonzales-execution-texas/74176166007/)
I’ve left the faith but Jesus literally says “so you have heard eye for an eye, but I tell you…” so that’s DEFINITELY not something a Christian can use
Eye for an eye is part of the Old Testament. I am a Christian. Jesus taught that it is better to turn and offer the other cheek if one strikes you on your right one. Also to love your enemies.
So what? Jesus said he came to fulfill the old testament.
Matthew 5:17 says, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them"
That’s an incomplete reading. In verse 18 he says nothing will change with the law until the end of time. He altered none of the prophets’ teachings. Same chapter is also where he says turn the other cheek and love your enemy. Again, this is all up for individual interpretation or it being interpreted by a denomination, but it’s not what I was taught.
Do not murder? Murder is to kill someone without due judgement. The Bible has judges to weigh testimonies and evidence. And they used the death penalty for some crimes.
I’m not sure what you are looking for. There are two words in Hebrew for the concepts of killing and murder. The word used in this context is broadly meant to mean “murder”. “Kill” is overbroad and is not textually supported. You could consider the numerable instances of God sanctioned killings in the Old Testament as evidence against the existence of a moral imperative that prohibited “killing” generally.
As a discussion topic with other sources, feel free to read any of these threads
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskBibleScholars/comments/9nkz42/thou_shalt_not_kill/
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskBibleScholars/comments/inhy90/thou_shall_not_kill_vs_you_shall_not_murder_which/
https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/comments/cfuqu6/you_shall_not_murder_rasah/
This statement is an issue of the times the Bible took place not really its teachings.
Yes there were judges and death penalty in Ancient Rome when the Bible took place. The church themselves did not do the death penalty but the legal officials at the time did.
If we can say it is morally correct just because it exists in the Bible then the following things also exists: child brides, slavery, prostitution punishments like stoning and hanging, women could not own property.
A baby has done nothing wrong to deserve the death penalty. The mother and father performed an act which historically has an outcome. I believe in exceptions for rape incest and the life of the mother like a majority of pro life people.
However, a human being can do things to not deserve their place in this world. This has been accepted throughout christiandom until very recently for some reason. The Bible has several examples of prescribing the death penalty(many obviously archaic and not acceptable in a modern society but many all the same), it baffles me that Christians or atheists hide behind religion to be anti-death penalty. This doesn't mean that a child rapist can't right himself by God. As a Christian I have to believe that God's grace can extend to such a person but they can figure that out on the way to the firing squad, that's between them and god.
Simply put, there are certain offenses that we as a society should understand are automatic death penalty events. Innocent life should be protected, if we have one responsibility as a society it is the protection of the innocent.
“The Bible discusses the death penalty in various contexts. In the Old Testament, it was prescribed for certain offenses as part of the Mosaic Law. For example, Exodus 21:12 says, "Anyone who strikes a person with a fatal blow is to be put to death." However, in the New Testament, the emphasis shifts towards forgiveness and redemption. Jesus, for instance, stopped the execution of a woman caught in adultery in John 8:7 by stating, "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." This reflects a move towards grace and mercy, though it does not explicitly abolish the death penalty. The application of these teachings is complex and varies among Christian beliefs.”
Do you want an actual answer? Criminals were given a chance to live peacefully in society. Unborn children are innocent of wrongdoing and have not had a chance. Don’t downvote me, just answering.
I'm very liberal and I'm not keen on either of those. If you have to murder, murder, but don't expect me to approve unless someone else would die otherwise.
For many it is easy to "celebrate" when someone like this is executed. However, I think about the innocent people who were executed and/or remain on Death Row, that there is still a non-zero number of innocent people being killed by the government.
This is still a barbaric and error-ridden system.
We should not 'celebrate' the one time it 'worked' and even that I am unsure what the purpose of this is when it so-calls 'works.'
Edit: Thanks for the award!
A lot of people have admitted to crimes they didn’t do. A man in California, Thomas Perez, was coerced into confessing that he killed his father in 2018 after being interrogated for 17 hours straight. That’s only part of what the police did to Perez. The only thing that saved him was that his father wasn’t actually dead.
Perez was recently awarded around $1 million in a settlement and to be frank, the cops got off light. Everyone involved in that interrogation should be fired, fined, and blacklisted from law enforcement forever.
I support the death penalty in theory for truly heinous crimes but too often the police fuck up whether accidentally or maliciously in convincing people.
Edit: to be clear, I’m not insinuating that Gonzales is innocent just that other people are possibly innocent.
>He's talking about innocent people that have languished in jails or have been executed.
Sure, and that's a real problem that could be used as a reason for being against the death penalty, but this is a really bad case to use that example since in no way does it apply here. Dude said he did it. Dude maintained he did it till the end. Dude took them to the body. Dude confessed out of the blue.
You want to use him as an example to not execute a person who is repentant. Fine. But in no way is this a person that should be mentioned in the same realm of wrongfully convicted people who languish on death row.
So what’s your point, we shouldn’t use confessions as evidence? Because if the response to “he confessed and took authorities to the body of the woman he murdered” is “but some confessions are false”, what point are you trying to prove?
I think the point is that we should not have the death penalty at all because of several reasons, not the least of which being the chance for error on the part of the legal system.
Your content was removed as a violation of Rule 1: Be Friendly.
Personal attacks on your fellow Reddit users are not allowed, this includes both direct insults and general aggressiveness. In addition, hate speech, threats (regardless of intent), and calls to violence, will also be removed. Remember the human and follow [reddiquette](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette).
There has been many instances of innocent people who were convicted because they were coerced into a confession, and later exonerated.
Not saying that’s the case here, totally unfamiliar with this case. But I just want to point out that a confession or admission of guilt does not guarantee that the person is actually guilty.
He deserved to die but the state shouldnt have the right to kill citizens.
That said this feels like a really tacky place to bring it up. I dont like the system and I want to change it but I wont pretend to be upset when bad people get whats coming to them. Theres a time and place, idk this time and this place feels like it is not for debating the death penalty
Fuck this dude
Then who is responsible for killing them? Who will take that responsibility on and be impartial? I have no answer to those questions. I do support having a death penalty but our justice system is not great and that’s all we have right now.
Just because someone deserves to die doesnt mean anyone has a right to kill him. Its a bummer but the right answer is some people who have earned death get to keep living. Its worth that sacrifice, because no government should have power to kill its citizens, and also we cant have mobs running around passing out street justice. So the answer is nobody kills him
I don’t agree as I do think there are individuals who definitely do not deserve to live and society does have the right to remove them from living. The one absolute is there are always special circumstances.
Really? We the people. We make up society and we also make up government. We also make mobs from time to time. Don’t be facetious when this post is about state execution. One which our SOCIETY decided on and defined.
Can't trust it to execute citizens convicted of heinous crimes but we trust it with:
1. A nuclear arsenal capable of destroying all life on earth dozens of times over.
2. The most powerful military in the history of mankind (and the ability to coerce people to join via drafting) .
3. Subjective control over almost ever facet of our lives from what we eat, drink, where we live and the content we consume.
Try telling that to anybody innocent who’s been railroaded by the system to a death sentence.
“I’m sorry, man, it sucks, but it’s gotta be like this for you, otherwise we wouldn’t be able to do the same to others”
There is nothing barbaric about putting someone to sleep for the last time. Nearly every other way to die is far more barbaric than this. Heart attack, cancer, Alzheimer’s, accident: all far more barbaric. Getting raped and then murdered is also far more barbaric than this.
We need a 2nd test to determine if the death penalty is appropriate. Use objective evidence like video footage, dna evidence and ballistics. If you meet the criteria of objective guilt where there is no chance of evidence proving innocence, then put someone to death in days instead of years.
Killing innocent people by coercing their false confession is barbaric. A SCOTUS justice (Roberts) even said “someone’s actual innocence isn’t a reason to undo a court’s legal finding of their guilt” which is so fucked up.
Absolutely agree. There is no real reason for the state to execute people they already incarcerate beyond a want for revenge. The problem with this is that a the state is not prosecuting criminal charges on behalf of the victim. The state prosecutes criminally for violations of the law not to make a victim whole but to remedy the violation against the state. If you want revenge, then file a civil suit.
…which is insane.
I understand both sides of the argument and sympathize with both… but also I’ll bet our ancestors and developing countries look at how we do it here and they’re like *don’t you people know how mobs and rocks work? This is not complicated.*
Or like Scotty in the first Austin Powers… “seriously—I got a gun, I’ll go in there, bang, done.”
But yeah if I was wrongly convicted or someone I know to be innocent was, my approval would go from 50 percent to zero in as many seconds.
It costs more because of our mandatory appeals process that's supposed to be an error correcting system, and while it does work, it isn't perfect and it's slow as shit.
> I understand both sides of the argument and sympathize with both… but also I’ll bet our ancestors and developing countries look at how we do it here and they’re like don’t you people know how mobs and rocks work? This is not complicated.
Are you advocating for lynchings, or am I missing something here?
Yeah, your attitude is the reason why we prosecute lynch mobs and vigilantes. The people that the public want to believe did the crime aren't always the people who actually did the crime. People get exonerated pretty regularly, sometimes after rotting away in jail for decades. and those people are *never* compensated fairly for the loss of their freedom and livelihood.
Everyone deserves the right to competent legal representation, a fair and speedy trial (I know they don't get it, but they deserve it), and to be treated with dignity while incarcerated. Without these things we can't call ourselves a just or civil society.
I respect your opinion while I do not share it. When Timothy McVeigh was executed, I remember an article where they got quotes from many people. One was a prominent opponent of capital punishment, and he said things like what you are saying. And he ended by basically saying that is what I believed yesterday and I will believe it again tomorrow. Today, justice can be done. That really stuck with me.
The purpose is to remove violent animals from our civilization.
No system is perfect, but 12 people find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, then 12 more have to sentence them in a separate trial, then a judge must certify the sentence.. all before appeals begin, which are long, thorough, and tiresome for the victims.
My only wish was that it was faster.
>No system is perfect
Therein lies the issue.
The essence of what you are saying is that you are fine with the government killing innocent people if sometimes it makes you feel good that a bad guy was killed.
People should not assume that because you’re against the death penalty it means you’re defending the criminal. In reality it’s defending our values as a democracy with humans rights and personal freedoms enshrined in a constitution. Not even Russia puts people to death anymore, and given that the US is the only western democracy with the death penalty, I think it says a lot about how far we have to go.
I guess the question is, is this person able to be rehabilitated? If we believe that’s true of every person than yea no reason to have the death penalty other than it does seem to provide justice/closure for the victims families. IMO, keeping someone locked in a cell for 60+ years isn’t humane either.
The death penalty is supposed to be a penalty to prevent people from committing the crimes that get you there.
It’s not supposed to be a celebration of the killing of another person. But that’s how some people see it.
Barbaric punishment no matter who does it.
The death penalty permanently removes violent animals from civilization.
[This is Bridget Townsend, who is not 41 years old now because of this animal](https://www.usatoday.com/gcdn/authoring/authoring-images/2024/06/24/USAT/74199387007-bridget-t.JPG?width=660&height=511&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp)
That's the life we should be worried about, not this piece of shit.
It does. Years or decades after the fact. It's meant to be a deterrent from heinous crimes, and the length of the feedback loop makes it a worthless deterrent.
Act like an animal, get put down like one. The only thing barbaric is what this monster did to that innocent girl. One less mouth to feed with our tax dollars.
> One less mouth to feed with our tax dollars.
The economic argument is not a good one. At least with how the system actually works: works out to cost tax payers more money than to imprison the criminal for life.
Exactly. And also there are plenty of people who know full well what they could be punished with and they just don't care, or they have so much confidence that they don't expect to get caught. We could theoretically go even more barbaric but that's not going to deter those people.
Born to a teenage mother who didn’t want him. Abused his whole childhood. Turned him into a monster.
Her associating with a known drug dealer put her in danger.
This is just sad all the way around.
So you just blamed the rape and murder victim for being raped and murdered? Maybe want to stop with your boomer level brainwashing. Nobody has the right to rape and murder, nor should it ever be unsafe to mingle with anyone in a functioning society.
I’m 34… I didn’t blame her. What happened to her is horrible and would not wish that on anyone. I stated that it was tragic.
Does not change the reality that her dating a known drug dealer increased the likelihood of being a victim of violence.
“nor should it ever be unsafe to mingle with anyone in a functioning society”
This will never be the case as there will always be people who will put their wants over someone else’s.
As a fellow taxpayer, I do not see value in killing people to save money. Not to mention, the death penalty [costs more than life imprisonment](https://www.cato.org/blog/financial-implications-death-penalty).
A commutation would have not have suddenly given him a chance at parole; he would still rot in prison.
Where is the value? We didn't save any money and he was sequestered away from the population. His death didn't bring back the woman he viciously murdered. The daily life of neither you nor I was affected in any way, shape or form. All this did was reinforce the idea that the state can kill people.
Many of the same people saying Ramiro Gonzales should die for his crimes also attend church on Sundays to celebrate the words of a man who *up to the moment of his death* proclaimed that people can be redeemed and deserve mercy.
What Gonzales did was horrendous, but it was reported that he repented and was making daily amends for years. Not good enough for radical Texas so-called Christians. If there is a God, they better hope he's merciful and not more concerned with "justice."
I view the death penalty as getting off easy.
A life sentence still means they die in prison, but a death penalty means they just get to skip to the end.
Justice isn’t always pretty, I understand being anti-death penalty in most cases, but he was convicted of one violent rape and plead guilty to and took them to the body of another rape/murder victim. This dude could never be released and paying for a comfortable existence isn’t fair to taxpayers or victims.
"Each death penalty case in Texas costs taxpayers about $2.3 million. That is about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years."
https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/REL/76th2011/ExhibitDocument/OpenExhibitDocument?exhibitId=17686&fileDownloadName=h041211ab501_pescetta.pdf
Execution doesn't save the taxpayer, it costs them. We spend tax payer money to satiate peoples bloodlust and thirst for revenge.
This is a completely LUDICROUS claim to make and full of holes. It does not even take an expert to identify there are errors. The death penalty cost statistic involves a ton of other things like employee time and effort and labors involved. While that is a value, it is nowhere NEAR the same as comparing 4 years of a person's life, living, and food and medical care.
Those are still costs to the taxpayer. You don’t get to choose which costs count in your analysis and which don’t. Yes, the reason death row convictions cost more is because of the legal processes involved, but just because it doesn’t fall in the bucket of “food and shelter” doesn’t mean those dollars don’t burden taxpayers. It’s not inaccurate to say that the death penalty ultimately costs taxpayers more than a life imprisonment sentence.
Outdated pricing model and a different states cost profile, that link isn’t very convincing. Plus, no cost tracking for inflation and I wonder how much of that money is for holding and review periods/pay. Again, in this case there should have been no long term review. I don’t believe in the death penalty for non-violent crimes or crimes reliant solely on testimony, but this is 100% justified. I don’t want to kill an innocent person on accident, but for this kind of crime it should be swift.
Unless you have facts and figures disputing this I'm afraid I can't believe you
Capital punishment is barbaric, it saves no money, it certainly doesn't reverse the crime, and for the vengeance-minded, it's an easy way out for someone who would otherwise be forced to live with the things they have done
Sorry your feelings go against every published study showing it costs more to execute someone over housing them in jail for the rest of their natural life.
Feel free to post any proof you are seeing, because I have never seen that argument made, even by Death Penalty advocates.
Singapore, a nation with a higher GDP per capita and higher HDI than the United States, executes criminals for less than a tenth of the cost we pay. The system is intentionally convoluted and designed to take decades of appeals and legal work with account for almost all of the cost of the death penalty.
That's because we enjoy [more due process rights than Singapore.](https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/singapore/#:~:text=Arbitrary%20Arrest%3A%20Some%20laws%2C%20such,a%20threat%20to%20public%20safety%2C)
"Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: preventive detention by the government under various laws that dispense with regular judicial due process; monitoring private electronic or telephone conversations without a warrant; serious restrictions on freedom of expression and media, including the enforcement of criminal libel laws to limit expression; serious restrictions on internet freedom; and substantial legal and regulatory limitations on the rights of peaceful assembly and freedom of association."
Can you put a price on freedom?
If you’re trying to change our rights to mimic Singapore so we can legally kill people, then you’ve already lost the argument. No one wants the Singapore Justice system here.
If you want to make a GDP the argument, then why does most states with high GDP not have the death penalty?
The states who execute the most tend to have lower GDP.
It only cost so much because it takes two to three decades of appeals and administrative proceedings to carry out the sentence. Singapore does it within a year of the conviction being handed down, and as a result the cost is less than a tenth what we pay to execute a criminal.
So what? Should killing people using the government be cheap? Should it be easier?
People are wrongfully convicted all the time and even plead guilty to crimes they didn't commit. We shouldn't be using taxpayer funds to kill people when we could be wrong. Period.
Who said anything about comfort?
Also, with all the expenses included, isn't it oddly cheaper to keep a person in a maximum security prison for life than to kill them?
I suspect that it is much cheaper. Lawyers’ fees, appeals, filings, etc. etc. add up to a huge amount when the death penalty is in play. Lock ‘em up and forget them.
Yes, no work, free food and lodging, it’s more comfortable than you probably think in most cases. I seriously doubt it’s cheaper to keep pieces of shit like this alive for decades than injecting them. The worst part is they paid for him to live this long, should have done it much sooner.
According to [this fact check ](https://ballotpedia.org/Fact_check/Is_the_death_penalty_more_expensive_than_life_in_prison) it's actually about 50% cheaper to keep them for life than to kill them.
Also, I would love for you to spend a week in a maximum security prison gen pop and see if you still think it's "comfortable"
Bifurcated trials - cases involving the death penalty have two separate trials. One to determine guilt, and another to determine if the death penalty is appropriate.
Nope, I see no valid facts presented, just manipulated data from a long time ago. Show me relevant up to date facts and I will absolutely change my mind.
Why don't you show facts that show that you're correct?
ETA: [Here's a report](https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/REL/76th2011/ExhibitDocument/OpenExhibitDocument?exhibitId=17686&fileDownloadName=h041211ab501_pescetta.pdf) that features statistics on Texas.
Each death penalty case in Texas costs taxpayers about $2.3 million. That is about three times the cost of imprisoning
someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years. ("Executions Cost Texas Millions," Dallas Morning
News, March 8, 1992.
Let's find another article: https://www.cato.org/blog/financial-implications-death-penalty
Now find me one article or report that confirms your beliefs, because you've provided none.
Also, do you have any proof that the facts provided were manipulated, or is this another hunch your gut is telling you that you'll choose to believe over substantive data and resources because it doesn't comport to your ignorant world view?
How about you prove your point of view with facts instead? At the moment, your entire interaction with this has been "no not THOSE facts,no don't believe them" and I don't think you're physically capable of accepting a reality that doesn't agree with your bias.
The facts are that the extra cost is the legal expense of appeals. Nothing to do with the actual incarceration versus the death penalty.
It's all systemic costs that don't actually relate to the costs we are talking about. Lawyers are just taking advantage.
Legal costs are still costs, and come from taxpayer money. This is not the “own” you think it is, your opinion of legal fees being incidental to the cost of death penalty incarceration doesn’t change the fact that if they just got a life sentence and not the death penalty, it would cost fewer dollars overall.
If that's true then why isn't everyone committing the worst crimes possible for the free food and shelter? If prison is so good, as you say it is, then why isn't everyone trying to get in there?
Here's the real truth - prison is a terrible place and you wouldn't last five minutes there if you think it's better than being free. People die from heat exhaustion in prison facilities every year, like clockwork.
Have you been to prison? Or is this just more speculation from someone with little to no life experience on the subject providing their unnecessary and inaccurate two cents?
He turned to you and said “I’m gonna commit this crime for the free bed?”
It feels like you’re just making up a lot of shit at this point rather than just acknowledging that you’re misinformed. I can’t imagine how the conversation telling you Santa and the Easter Bunny aren’t real went
Your content was removed as a violation of Rule 1: Be Friendly.
Personal attacks on your fellow Reddit users are not allowed, this includes both direct insults and general aggressiveness. In addition, hate speech, threats (regardless of intent), and calls to violence, will also be removed. Remember the human and follow [reddiquette](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette).
He confessed to another crime, the cops didn’t figure it out or prove it.
Without that confession he would have been a free man these days.
To me, that’s worth life in prison.
I’ve seen the word barbaric several times by other commenters here. First off, there’s nothing barbaric about lethal injection. It is one of the most peaceful ways to die, but others here are making it seemed like he had a public beheading. Like, shut the hell up. This guy kidnapped, raped, and murdered a girl. You wouldn’t be saying that crap if it was your daughter or relative that he did this to.
Finally [justice for Bridget Townsend, this piece of shit's victim](https://www.usatoday.com/gcdn/authoring/authoring-images/2024/06/24/USAT/74199387007-bridget-t.JPG?width=660&height=511&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp)
> I'm sorry
idgaf
They didn’t ‘catch him’ for it. He confessed after he already had a life sentence for the second rape/kidnapping.
They helpfully put that info right in the article
Your content was removed as a violation of Rule 1: Be Friendly.
Personal attacks on your fellow Reddit users are not allowed, this includes both direct insults and general aggressiveness. In addition, hate speech, threats (regardless of intent), and calls to violence, will also be removed. Remember the human and follow [reddiquette](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette).
Oh shit, since he said he found religion, we should just let him out!
He was evil because of the acts he committed. And now he’s not stealing our oxygen anymore.
Poor girl. Her parents talk a lot about how she loved life and scrutinized the decisions her killer made (rightfully so) but she was also dating a drug dealer who clearly was into his own dumb shit. She made some bad decisions as well. Poor poor girl tho. Literally every decision we make could be our last
I will simply say this. He acknowledged his crime, and said what you would hope one would say in his position. He deserves credit for that.
Not suggesting he should have been turned loose or any such nonsense.
Good! They should have done it a lot sooner. He was a POS.
> For nearly two years, no one but Gonzales knew what happened to Bridget (Townsend). One day while he was serving a life sentence for the rape and kidnapping of another woman, Gonzales decided to confess to killing Bridget, leading authorities to her remains in a field in Bandera, a small town 40 miles northwest of San Antonio. > (Townsend's Mother) says she didn’t even have a body to bury on Oct. 16, 2002 because Gonzales "wanted to see her body decay.” Amazing this took 22 years.
I didn’t see that second quote in the article. Where is it from?
[It's from the link in the article to the article about the victim and her mother specifically.](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/06/25/bridget-townsend-ramiro-gonzales-execution-texas/74176166007/)
Thanks.
Why are most religious anti-abortionists for the death penalty?
I’m a religious person and I often have the exact same question. It’s the 6th commandment, right there in black and white.
But so is the eye for an eye statement, and in both testaments. Maybe folks just cherry pick what fits their overall social belief system?
I’ve left the faith but Jesus literally says “so you have heard eye for an eye, but I tell you…” so that’s DEFINITELY not something a Christian can use
Jesus would be shocked as to who claim to be his followers…
Eye for an eye is part of the Old Testament. I am a Christian. Jesus taught that it is better to turn and offer the other cheek if one strikes you on your right one. Also to love your enemies.
So what? Jesus said he came to fulfill the old testament. Matthew 5:17 says, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them"
That’s an incomplete reading. In verse 18 he says nothing will change with the law until the end of time. He altered none of the prophets’ teachings. Same chapter is also where he says turn the other cheek and love your enemy. Again, this is all up for individual interpretation or it being interpreted by a denomination, but it’s not what I was taught.
Funny how it’s interpreted in so many different ways to fit into whichever way best manipulates people? Kind of makes you think it’s all just made up…
So ig the constitution is made up, the pursuit of happiness etc?
The bible…
The HOA’s rules list the next town over is made up then like bruh what are you tryna say 😂
The amendments, laws, etc?
The bible…
Bruh what you said is such a broad statement and a desperate attempt to grab at straws. I get what you’re saying but be fr.
You just described Catholicism
Do not murder? Murder is to kill someone without due judgement. The Bible has judges to weigh testimonies and evidence. And they used the death penalty for some crimes.
There’s some debate on translation and I’m not one to say what’s the most accurate but I and everyone I know grew up with thou shall not kill.
There isn’t really any debate. The language used in the text stands for the concept of murder. A separate word is used when referencing killing.
You got a credible source on that? Cause if we’re nitpicking translations then I have a lotttt of questions about Leviticus
I’m not sure what you are looking for. There are two words in Hebrew for the concepts of killing and murder. The word used in this context is broadly meant to mean “murder”. “Kill” is overbroad and is not textually supported. You could consider the numerable instances of God sanctioned killings in the Old Testament as evidence against the existence of a moral imperative that prohibited “killing” generally. As a discussion topic with other sources, feel free to read any of these threads https://www.reddit.com/r/AskBibleScholars/comments/9nkz42/thou_shalt_not_kill/ https://www.reddit.com/r/AskBibleScholars/comments/inhy90/thou_shall_not_kill_vs_you_shall_not_murder_which/ https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/comments/cfuqu6/you_shall_not_murder_rasah/
This statement is an issue of the times the Bible took place not really its teachings. Yes there were judges and death penalty in Ancient Rome when the Bible took place. The church themselves did not do the death penalty but the legal officials at the time did. If we can say it is morally correct just because it exists in the Bible then the following things also exists: child brides, slavery, prostitution punishments like stoning and hanging, women could not own property.
I think it's mostly because of the concept of innocence. Religious generally aren't against harm as a form of punishment.
A baby has done nothing wrong to deserve the death penalty. The mother and father performed an act which historically has an outcome. I believe in exceptions for rape incest and the life of the mother like a majority of pro life people. However, a human being can do things to not deserve their place in this world. This has been accepted throughout christiandom until very recently for some reason. The Bible has several examples of prescribing the death penalty(many obviously archaic and not acceptable in a modern society but many all the same), it baffles me that Christians or atheists hide behind religion to be anti-death penalty. This doesn't mean that a child rapist can't right himself by God. As a Christian I have to believe that God's grace can extend to such a person but they can figure that out on the way to the firing squad, that's between them and god. Simply put, there are certain offenses that we as a society should understand are automatic death penalty events. Innocent life should be protected, if we have one responsibility as a society it is the protection of the innocent.
“The Bible discusses the death penalty in various contexts. In the Old Testament, it was prescribed for certain offenses as part of the Mosaic Law. For example, Exodus 21:12 says, "Anyone who strikes a person with a fatal blow is to be put to death." However, in the New Testament, the emphasis shifts towards forgiveness and redemption. Jesus, for instance, stopped the execution of a woman caught in adultery in John 8:7 by stating, "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." This reflects a move towards grace and mercy, though it does not explicitly abolish the death penalty. The application of these teachings is complex and varies among Christian beliefs.”
Do you want an actual answer? Criminals were given a chance to live peacefully in society. Unborn children are innocent of wrongdoing and have not had a chance. Don’t downvote me, just answering.
That’s like asking “why are you pro rape?”
I am not a person of faith and I am not anti-abortion. This guy deserved worse than what he got. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Why are most feminist progressives defending a rapist?
Correct, no one should defend any rapist at all ever. Yet the republican nominee was found liable for rape.. this is a fucking crazy time to be alive.
I’m on the same side as you but we have to be clear in messaging: legally, he was found liable of sexual assault by a jury of his peers.
Heard that I’ll adjust moving forward thank you!
Liberals are for abortions but against executions. I know…twilight zone.
I'm very liberal and I'm not keen on either of those. If you have to murder, murder, but don't expect me to approve unless someone else would die otherwise.
For many it is easy to "celebrate" when someone like this is executed. However, I think about the innocent people who were executed and/or remain on Death Row, that there is still a non-zero number of innocent people being killed by the government. This is still a barbaric and error-ridden system. We should not 'celebrate' the one time it 'worked' and even that I am unsure what the purpose of this is when it so-calls 'works.' Edit: Thanks for the award!
Didn't someone just get found to be innocent and he was on death row? Yes, Kerry Max Cook. They just exonerated him.
Good news for you. He admitted to his crime.
A lot of people have admitted to crimes they didn’t do. A man in California, Thomas Perez, was coerced into confessing that he killed his father in 2018 after being interrogated for 17 hours straight. That’s only part of what the police did to Perez. The only thing that saved him was that his father wasn’t actually dead. Perez was recently awarded around $1 million in a settlement and to be frank, the cops got off light. Everyone involved in that interrogation should be fired, fined, and blacklisted from law enforcement forever. I support the death penalty in theory for truly heinous crimes but too often the police fuck up whether accidentally or maliciously in convincing people. Edit: to be clear, I’m not insinuating that Gonzales is innocent just that other people are possibly innocent.
He led investigators to the body of the girl he raped and murdered, then left in a field so that he could watch her decay.
He admitted to it, and took officers to his body. Just because some people have given false confessions doesn’t mean all confessions are false.
That's not what he's talking about. He's talking about innocent people that have languished in jails or have been executed.
>He's talking about innocent people that have languished in jails or have been executed. Sure, and that's a real problem that could be used as a reason for being against the death penalty, but this is a really bad case to use that example since in no way does it apply here. Dude said he did it. Dude maintained he did it till the end. Dude took them to the body. Dude confessed out of the blue. You want to use him as an example to not execute a person who is repentant. Fine. But in no way is this a person that should be mentioned in the same realm of wrongfully convicted people who languish on death row.
Seems like the threat of execution is no deterrent for these sorts of people
It's not.
so why is texas killing them?
You’re right, that is awful and nobody wants that to happen.
So what’s your point, we shouldn’t use confessions as evidence? Because if the response to “he confessed and took authorities to the body of the woman he murdered” is “but some confessions are false”, what point are you trying to prove?
I think the bigger issue is likely the amount of coerced confessions that take place.
So you're good with coerced confessions when the individual is innocent? Got it.
I think the point is that we should not have the death penalty at all because of several reasons, not the least of which being the chance for error on the part of the legal system.
Not to mention that the death penalty does not deter crime. Never has.
[удалено]
Your content was removed as a violation of Rule 1: Be Friendly. Personal attacks on your fellow Reddit users are not allowed, this includes both direct insults and general aggressiveness. In addition, hate speech, threats (regardless of intent), and calls to violence, will also be removed. Remember the human and follow [reddiquette](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette).
Yeah, but most of those people are not able to lead investigators directly to the body of the missing person.
There has been many instances of innocent people who were convicted because they were coerced into a confession, and later exonerated. Not saying that’s the case here, totally unfamiliar with this case. But I just want to point out that a confession or admission of guilt does not guarantee that the person is actually guilty.
There have been many, many more cases where someone confessed because they did it.
Well, I sure hope you're never in a situation where the police are trying to charge you with a crime that you did not commit.
I rather a 1000 murderers sit in prison without the death penalty than risk one innocent person being executed.
That’s not a good reason to look over the many instances where someone was coerced into falsely admitting it was them and executed
He deserved to die but the state shouldnt have the right to kill citizens. That said this feels like a really tacky place to bring it up. I dont like the system and I want to change it but I wont pretend to be upset when bad people get whats coming to them. Theres a time and place, idk this time and this place feels like it is not for debating the death penalty Fuck this dude
Then who is responsible for killing them? Who will take that responsibility on and be impartial? I have no answer to those questions. I do support having a death penalty but our justice system is not great and that’s all we have right now.
Just because someone deserves to die doesnt mean anyone has a right to kill him. Its a bummer but the right answer is some people who have earned death get to keep living. Its worth that sacrifice, because no government should have power to kill its citizens, and also we cant have mobs running around passing out street justice. So the answer is nobody kills him
I don’t agree as I do think there are individuals who definitely do not deserve to live and society does have the right to remove them from living. The one absolute is there are always special circumstances.
“Society” is not a body capable of performing execution. When you say “society” do you mean the state? Or the mob?
Really? We the people. We make up society and we also make up government. We also make mobs from time to time. Don’t be facetious when this post is about state execution. One which our SOCIETY decided on and defined.
Can't trust it to execute citizens convicted of heinous crimes but we trust it with: 1. A nuclear arsenal capable of destroying all life on earth dozens of times over. 2. The most powerful military in the history of mankind (and the ability to coerce people to join via drafting) . 3. Subjective control over almost ever facet of our lives from what we eat, drink, where we live and the content we consume.
That doesn’t make it less barbaric.
Barbaric is okay sometimes
Try telling that to anybody innocent who’s been railroaded by the system to a death sentence. “I’m sorry, man, it sucks, but it’s gotta be like this for you, otherwise we wouldn’t be able to do the same to others”
Guarantee your tune would change if you were unjustly convicted.
There is nothing barbaric about putting someone to sleep for the last time. Nearly every other way to die is far more barbaric than this. Heart attack, cancer, Alzheimer’s, accident: all far more barbaric. Getting raped and then murdered is also far more barbaric than this. We need a 2nd test to determine if the death penalty is appropriate. Use objective evidence like video footage, dna evidence and ballistics. If you meet the criteria of objective guilt where there is no chance of evidence proving innocence, then put someone to death in days instead of years.
Killing innocent people by coercing their false confession is barbaric. A SCOTUS justice (Roberts) even said “someone’s actual innocence isn’t a reason to undo a court’s legal finding of their guilt” which is so fucked up.
It’s not putting someone to sleep. It’s killing them. Pretty significant difference there.
lol you don't know a fucking thing about the death penalty
Absolutely agree. There is no real reason for the state to execute people they already incarcerate beyond a want for revenge. The problem with this is that a the state is not prosecuting criminal charges on behalf of the victim. The state prosecutes criminally for violations of the law not to make a victim whole but to remedy the violation against the state. If you want revenge, then file a civil suit.
It also costs taxpayers far more to execute someone than lock them up for life.
…which is insane. I understand both sides of the argument and sympathize with both… but also I’ll bet our ancestors and developing countries look at how we do it here and they’re like *don’t you people know how mobs and rocks work? This is not complicated.* Or like Scotty in the first Austin Powers… “seriously—I got a gun, I’ll go in there, bang, done.” But yeah if I was wrongly convicted or someone I know to be innocent was, my approval would go from 50 percent to zero in as many seconds.
It costs more because of our mandatory appeals process that's supposed to be an error correcting system, and while it does work, it isn't perfect and it's slow as shit.
Don't bother, he's just here to troll. Look at his other comments.
It’s not insane specifically because executing an innocent person for a crime they did not do and while the true offender walks free is so fucked up.
> I understand both sides of the argument and sympathize with both… but also I’ll bet our ancestors and developing countries look at how we do it here and they’re like don’t you people know how mobs and rocks work? This is not complicated. Are you advocating for lynchings, or am I missing something here?
Yeah, your attitude is the reason why we prosecute lynch mobs and vigilantes. The people that the public want to believe did the crime aren't always the people who actually did the crime. People get exonerated pretty regularly, sometimes after rotting away in jail for decades. and those people are *never* compensated fairly for the loss of their freedom and livelihood. Everyone deserves the right to competent legal representation, a fair and speedy trial (I know they don't get it, but they deserve it), and to be treated with dignity while incarcerated. Without these things we can't call ourselves a just or civil society.
We need to have public square hangings of DNA convicted murders and pedos.
No, I am going to celebrate every time a rapist is executed. No exceptions
You would if it was you , your wife or daughter . Rape and murder are life sentences for the victims .
I respect your opinion while I do not share it. When Timothy McVeigh was executed, I remember an article where they got quotes from many people. One was a prominent opponent of capital punishment, and he said things like what you are saying. And he ended by basically saying that is what I believed yesterday and I will believe it again tomorrow. Today, justice can be done. That really stuck with me.
The purpose is to remove violent animals from our civilization. No system is perfect, but 12 people find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, then 12 more have to sentence them in a separate trial, then a judge must certify the sentence.. all before appeals begin, which are long, thorough, and tiresome for the victims. My only wish was that it was faster.
>No system is perfect Therein lies the issue. The essence of what you are saying is that you are fine with the government killing innocent people if sometimes it makes you feel good that a bad guy was killed.
People should not assume that because you’re against the death penalty it means you’re defending the criminal. In reality it’s defending our values as a democracy with humans rights and personal freedoms enshrined in a constitution. Not even Russia puts people to death anymore, and given that the US is the only western democracy with the death penalty, I think it says a lot about how far we have to go.
Japan is not Western but it is a prosperous democracy and it has the death penalty.
I guess the question is, is this person able to be rehabilitated? If we believe that’s true of every person than yea no reason to have the death penalty other than it does seem to provide justice/closure for the victims families. IMO, keeping someone locked in a cell for 60+ years isn’t humane either.
Good riddance to bad rubbish.
The death penalty is supposed to be a penalty to prevent people from committing the crimes that get you there. It’s not supposed to be a celebration of the killing of another person. But that’s how some people see it. Barbaric punishment no matter who does it.
I think it’s pretty barbaric to rape and kill a defenseless young girl for no clear reason.
The death penalty permanently removes violent animals from civilization. [This is Bridget Townsend, who is not 41 years old now because of this animal](https://www.usatoday.com/gcdn/authoring/authoring-images/2024/06/24/USAT/74199387007-bridget-t.JPG?width=660&height=511&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp) That's the life we should be worried about, not this piece of shit.
It does. Years or decades after the fact. It's meant to be a deterrent from heinous crimes, and the length of the feedback loop makes it a worthless deterrent.
Act like an animal, get put down like one. The only thing barbaric is what this monster did to that innocent girl. One less mouth to feed with our tax dollars.
> One less mouth to feed with our tax dollars. The economic argument is not a good one. At least with how the system actually works: works out to cost tax payers more money than to imprison the criminal for life.
Yeah, I don't care. It's good he was executed because he was an un-American barbaric animal that raped an innocent girl.
Yeah, glad he was snuffed out. Also good to know how it all really works.
Bingo
Exactly. And also there are plenty of people who know full well what they could be punished with and they just don't care, or they have so much confidence that they don't expect to get caught. We could theoretically go even more barbaric but that's not going to deter those people.
Born to a teenage mother who didn’t want him. Abused his whole childhood. Turned him into a monster. Her associating with a known drug dealer put her in danger. This is just sad all the way around.
So you just blamed the rape and murder victim for being raped and murdered? Maybe want to stop with your boomer level brainwashing. Nobody has the right to rape and murder, nor should it ever be unsafe to mingle with anyone in a functioning society.
I’m 34… I didn’t blame her. What happened to her is horrible and would not wish that on anyone. I stated that it was tragic. Does not change the reality that her dating a known drug dealer increased the likelihood of being a victim of violence. “nor should it ever be unsafe to mingle with anyone in a functioning society” This will never be the case as there will always be people who will put their wants over someone else’s.
Happy birthday! I hope you enjoyed your present!
It was the victim's birthday...
His comments aged poorly
It's too hard for Reddit to even read the titles now.
I really just can’t understand the people who think we can rehabilitate rapists and murderers…
The death penalty has not deterred murderers from murdering.
No, but it has 100% stoped the convicted felons from killing again.
Outside of prison at least.
Neither has imprisonment
And the people of Texas gain nothing.
One less rapist murderer is not alive to be released on good behavior or continuing to live on taxpayers money. Those are gains.
As a fellow taxpayer, I do not see value in killing people to save money. Not to mention, the death penalty [costs more than life imprisonment](https://www.cato.org/blog/financial-implications-death-penalty). A commutation would have not have suddenly given him a chance at parole; he would still rot in prison.
Well, I do see the value.
Where is the value? We didn't save any money and he was sequestered away from the population. His death didn't bring back the woman he viciously murdered. The daily life of neither you nor I was affected in any way, shape or form. All this did was reinforce the idea that the state can kill people.
The value is a rapist is no longer alive. You have already stated you don’t believe in that value but it doesn’t mean that I don’t.
We got a lot more to go! This is just a start.
Rest in Piss
Many of the same people saying Ramiro Gonzales should die for his crimes also attend church on Sundays to celebrate the words of a man who *up to the moment of his death* proclaimed that people can be redeemed and deserve mercy. What Gonzales did was horrendous, but it was reported that he repented and was making daily amends for years. Not good enough for radical Texas so-called Christians. If there is a God, they better hope he's merciful and not more concerned with "justice."
One of the few times the State has actually acted in our interest.
I view the death penalty as getting off easy. A life sentence still means they die in prison, but a death penalty means they just get to skip to the end.
Ok.
This was not in our interest.
Justice isn’t always pretty, I understand being anti-death penalty in most cases, but he was convicted of one violent rape and plead guilty to and took them to the body of another rape/murder victim. This dude could never be released and paying for a comfortable existence isn’t fair to taxpayers or victims.
"Each death penalty case in Texas costs taxpayers about $2.3 million. That is about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years." https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/REL/76th2011/ExhibitDocument/OpenExhibitDocument?exhibitId=17686&fileDownloadName=h041211ab501_pescetta.pdf Execution doesn't save the taxpayer, it costs them. We spend tax payer money to satiate peoples bloodlust and thirst for revenge.
This is a completely LUDICROUS claim to make and full of holes. It does not even take an expert to identify there are errors. The death penalty cost statistic involves a ton of other things like employee time and effort and labors involved. While that is a value, it is nowhere NEAR the same as comparing 4 years of a person's life, living, and food and medical care.
Those are still costs to the taxpayer. You don’t get to choose which costs count in your analysis and which don’t. Yes, the reason death row convictions cost more is because of the legal processes involved, but just because it doesn’t fall in the bucket of “food and shelter” doesn’t mean those dollars don’t burden taxpayers. It’s not inaccurate to say that the death penalty ultimately costs taxpayers more than a life imprisonment sentence.
Outdated pricing model and a different states cost profile, that link isn’t very convincing. Plus, no cost tracking for inflation and I wonder how much of that money is for holding and review periods/pay. Again, in this case there should have been no long term review. I don’t believe in the death penalty for non-violent crimes or crimes reliant solely on testimony, but this is 100% justified. I don’t want to kill an innocent person on accident, but for this kind of crime it should be swift.
Unless you have facts and figures disputing this I'm afraid I can't believe you Capital punishment is barbaric, it saves no money, it certainly doesn't reverse the crime, and for the vengeance-minded, it's an easy way out for someone who would otherwise be forced to live with the things they have done
I can guarantee you that he will never re-offend. That's justification enough for his punishment.
The guarantee is the same whether he is in prison or dead
Sorry your feelings go against every published study showing it costs more to execute someone over housing them in jail for the rest of their natural life. Feel free to post any proof you are seeing, because I have never seen that argument made, even by Death Penalty advocates.
Singapore, a nation with a higher GDP per capita and higher HDI than the United States, executes criminals for less than a tenth of the cost we pay. The system is intentionally convoluted and designed to take decades of appeals and legal work with account for almost all of the cost of the death penalty.
That's because we enjoy [more due process rights than Singapore.](https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/singapore/#:~:text=Arbitrary%20Arrest%3A%20Some%20laws%2C%20such,a%20threat%20to%20public%20safety%2C) "Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: preventive detention by the government under various laws that dispense with regular judicial due process; monitoring private electronic or telephone conversations without a warrant; serious restrictions on freedom of expression and media, including the enforcement of criminal libel laws to limit expression; serious restrictions on internet freedom; and substantial legal and regulatory limitations on the rights of peaceful assembly and freedom of association." Can you put a price on freedom?
If you’re trying to change our rights to mimic Singapore so we can legally kill people, then you’ve already lost the argument. No one wants the Singapore Justice system here. If you want to make a GDP the argument, then why does most states with high GDP not have the death penalty? The states who execute the most tend to have lower GDP.
[удалено]
[удалено]
It only cost so much because it takes two to three decades of appeals and administrative proceedings to carry out the sentence. Singapore does it within a year of the conviction being handed down, and as a result the cost is less than a tenth what we pay to execute a criminal.
So what? Should killing people using the government be cheap? Should it be easier? People are wrongfully convicted all the time and even plead guilty to crimes they didn't commit. We shouldn't be using taxpayer funds to kill people when we could be wrong. Period.
Yes. The process should be expedited.
Who said anything about comfort? Also, with all the expenses included, isn't it oddly cheaper to keep a person in a maximum security prison for life than to kill them?
I suspect that it is much cheaper. Lawyers’ fees, appeals, filings, etc. etc. add up to a huge amount when the death penalty is in play. Lock ‘em up and forget them.
Yes, no work, free food and lodging, it’s more comfortable than you probably think in most cases. I seriously doubt it’s cheaper to keep pieces of shit like this alive for decades than injecting them. The worst part is they paid for him to live this long, should have done it much sooner.
According to [this fact check ](https://ballotpedia.org/Fact_check/Is_the_death_penalty_more_expensive_than_life_in_prison) it's actually about 50% cheaper to keep them for life than to kill them. Also, I would love for you to spend a week in a maximum security prison gen pop and see if you still think it's "comfortable"
Can someone explain why it cost more to kill someone ?
In part, costs related to lawyers fees from the years of appeals prior to an execution.
Bifurcated trials - cases involving the death penalty have two separate trials. One to determine guilt, and another to determine if the death penalty is appropriate.
Outdated pricing model from a different state that doesn’t list what they considered into the cost element, don’t buy it.
“The facts don’t align with my world view so I reject them!”
Nope, I see no valid facts presented, just manipulated data from a long time ago. Show me relevant up to date facts and I will absolutely change my mind.
Why don't you show facts that show that you're correct? ETA: [Here's a report](https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/REL/76th2011/ExhibitDocument/OpenExhibitDocument?exhibitId=17686&fileDownloadName=h041211ab501_pescetta.pdf) that features statistics on Texas. Each death penalty case in Texas costs taxpayers about $2.3 million. That is about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years. ("Executions Cost Texas Millions," Dallas Morning News, March 8, 1992. Let's find another article: https://www.cato.org/blog/financial-implications-death-penalty Now find me one article or report that confirms your beliefs, because you've provided none. Also, do you have any proof that the facts provided were manipulated, or is this another hunch your gut is telling you that you'll choose to believe over substantive data and resources because it doesn't comport to your ignorant world view?
How about you prove your point of view with facts instead? At the moment, your entire interaction with this has been "no not THOSE facts,no don't believe them" and I don't think you're physically capable of accepting a reality that doesn't agree with your bias.
The facts are that the extra cost is the legal expense of appeals. Nothing to do with the actual incarceration versus the death penalty. It's all systemic costs that don't actually relate to the costs we are talking about. Lawyers are just taking advantage.
Legal costs are still costs, and come from taxpayer money. This is not the “own” you think it is, your opinion of legal fees being incidental to the cost of death penalty incarceration doesn’t change the fact that if they just got a life sentence and not the death penalty, it would cost fewer dollars overall.
Nothing screams comfortable like being locked in prison am I right?
Yeah, having free housing, food, and medical care sounds like a better existence than a lot of Americans get.
If that's true then why isn't everyone committing the worst crimes possible for the free food and shelter? If prison is so good, as you say it is, then why isn't everyone trying to get in there? Here's the real truth - prison is a terrible place and you wouldn't last five minutes there if you think it's better than being free. People die from heat exhaustion in prison facilities every year, like clockwork. Have you been to prison? Or is this just more speculation from someone with little to no life experience on the subject providing their unnecessary and inaccurate two cents?
Some are, I’ve seen homeless dudes commit crimes to get hot meals and a bed.
He turned to you and said “I’m gonna commit this crime for the free bed?” It feels like you’re just making up a lot of shit at this point rather than just acknowledging that you’re misinformed. I can’t imagine how the conversation telling you Santa and the Easter Bunny aren’t real went
Good thing reality isn't reliant on your feelings or opinions.
[удалено]
Your content was removed as a violation of Rule 1: Be Friendly. Personal attacks on your fellow Reddit users are not allowed, this includes both direct insults and general aggressiveness. In addition, hate speech, threats (regardless of intent), and calls to violence, will also be removed. Remember the human and follow [reddiquette](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette).
He confessed to another crime, the cops didn’t figure it out or prove it. Without that confession he would have been a free man these days. To me, that’s worth life in prison.
No, he was serving a life sentence due to the violence of the first crime and while serving it he confessed to the second. Read the article.
I’ve seen the word barbaric several times by other commenters here. First off, there’s nothing barbaric about lethal injection. It is one of the most peaceful ways to die, but others here are making it seemed like he had a public beheading. Like, shut the hell up. This guy kidnapped, raped, and murdered a girl. You wouldn’t be saying that crap if it was your daughter or relative that he did this to.
Finally [justice for Bridget Townsend, this piece of shit's victim](https://www.usatoday.com/gcdn/authoring/authoring-images/2024/06/24/USAT/74199387007-bridget-t.JPG?width=660&height=511&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp) > I'm sorry idgaf
Justice was served.
He turned his life around in prison. Even if he had stayed evil, we shouldn't be killing people. It's so barbaric.
[удалено]
He raped another person before they caught him for the rape+murder he was executed for yesterday.
It's disgusting. I don't understand how people get on here and defend people like that.
I guess they are pro life.
They didn’t ‘catch him’ for it. He confessed after he already had a life sentence for the second rape/kidnapping. They helpfully put that info right in the article
Your content was removed as a violation of Rule 1: Be Friendly. Personal attacks on your fellow Reddit users are not allowed, this includes both direct insults and general aggressiveness. In addition, hate speech, threats (regardless of intent), and calls to violence, will also be removed. Remember the human and follow [reddiquette](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette).
Oh shit, since he said he found religion, we should just let him out! He was evil because of the acts he committed. And now he’s not stealing our oxygen anymore.
No, that's not why we shouldn't execute him.
Poor girl. Her parents talk a lot about how she loved life and scrutinized the decisions her killer made (rightfully so) but she was also dating a drug dealer who clearly was into his own dumb shit. She made some bad decisions as well. Poor poor girl tho. Literally every decision we make could be our last
Rapists and killers deserve no sympathy.
I will simply say this. He acknowledged his crime, and said what you would hope one would say in his position. He deserves credit for that. Not suggesting he should have been turned loose or any such nonsense.
The worst part is the hypocrisy
Happy birthday!