41–47 of 47 posts
They should put the reason before the text so you know none of them are worth reading.
Besides, aren't their last words the entire point of the site?
Interesting but now suprizing how many have found solace in religion.
They knew how broken the world is— they took part in the mayhem. They knew there is great evil around.
They found peace. Most asked forgiveness and apologized for what they had done. They left their relatives and friends with reasons to think of them as deeply flawed, but not completely terrible.
It seems a smart thing to do. It’s better than staying evil, frustrated and scared of your impending death.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, those acts are immensely terrible and the apologies feel minuscule by comparison. But I think there's room for more nuance here. There are multiple reasons we put people in jail: 1. the victims can feel some vindication and retribution 2. other members of society can feel some vindication and retribution and a sense of justice 3. other would-be criminals are detered from committing similar crimes for fear of pun…
Of course goal 1 is unfulfilled. Because victims are already dead. Often in very bad way. I’m sure there are enough people who will consider goals 2, 4 and 5 fulfilled. I disagree with your assessment. As I said - those pieces of shit lost their human privileges after what they did. You don’t fix them or reintroduce them to society. I don’t care about abstracts. I care about the fact that some of those scumbags were…
In this case, I was thinking of the family as the "victims", but, yes, you do have a point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was thinking about deep fakes and tech advancements. Yes, that will add doubts etc. but you know what? There always will be ways. If somebody was convicted in 2015 most likely there weren’t any deep fakes. Let’s look at, let’s say, Apple and its tight control over entire hardware and software iPhone stack. Nothing prevents them to announce that starting from iPhone 19 they cryptographically sign the video to ensure…
The problem is that I do understand you! I do feel exactly as you do! My lizard brain would like to do all sorts of horrible retaliations to those people who performed such abhorrent acts. I get it, it's natural. But I think that society should prevent this kind of basic instinctive response to become the way that we collectively handled those monstrosities, mainly because those punishments will be abused against inn…
https://exonerationregistry.org/sites/exonerationregistry.or...
In the end it's more about the appearance of justice than actually performing it. And even in the performance of it, it is still just that: a performance.
If you were to have capital punishment, I'd make prosecutors liable for any knowingly false accusations and the withholding of evidence. And even without that, things could change fast after a few posthumous exonerations when the pitchforks of the deceased's relatives come out for the phony witnesses and corrupt cops.
It's called the "justice system" but how can people be so sure it is? Justice only for the rich or the "club members"? Is it audited? Who gets to hide or shield from it under the guise of "national security?" Are juries being manipulated through the "Reptile Brain trial strategy?"
I recently heard someone say: "Cops kill cops who don't trust other cops?" Why is that? Is a cop killing another cop part of national security too? Who decides? Who do you trust?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Those pieces of shit lost their human privileges after what they did. If inmates don't get human rights, then every single person is just a corrupt judge away from becoming a non-person. No matter how horrible a person has acted, the government simply cannot be trusted not to abuse such power.
Please don’t rephrase me so it’s easier to argue. I am not talking about generic inmates, who deserve all protection (“no cruel and unusual punishment”), I’m talking about people like ones from the website. Who did horrible stuff and were convicted to death for it. I’m sure that if needed, society can develop necessary framework (declare them “legally dead” or something like that).
The most horrible people, some of whom were actually innocent?
I understand your emotional desire to (indirectly) hurt them, but the fact is that we can never be 100% sure that they were fully guilty of the acts exactly as described and everyone else in the world was completely innocent.
This means there is a nonzero chance of a miscarriage of justice, and you can't exactly un-execute someone. The only question remaining is: how many tortured and/or killed innocent warrant one monster not being harmed quite as much as your desire for revenge would like?
"Charles Thompson, executed January 28, 2026 In April 1998, Thompson forced his way into a Houston residence and shot a man and a woman following an argument. Both victims succumbed to their injuries as a result of the shooting." Wow so they kept this guy for almost 30 years on death row and then killed him. USA is so fucked
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this thought process is something that only people who have never been wronged can afford. There comes a time in life where the punishment must fit the crime, even if its only to make an example of the criminal. Life is hard enough, we should deter crimes at every possibility, people are rarely punished for every evil they commit.
See this is my point though, it shouldn't matter what has happened to you, if that matters, then this is 100% emotional and not based on reason or justice.