could see an innocent man dispatched for a crime he may not have committed.
Should we rather not execute a guilty person than kill an innocent person. I think the execution of a single innocent person should be an indictment on the death penalty
An Inclusive Site Dedicated to Life-Long Learning
Any thoughts worth writing about
On the lookout for more joy
Observations and reflectionsf
You - philosophical, thoughtful, witty. Me - still thinks fart jokes are funny. We should DEFINITELY get together!
Questioning the conventional wisdom
Everything random... At 3am 😊
These are unedited versions of my thoughts straight from the mind, a relieve from the ‘pressure cooker’, snippets and flotsam of a mundane existence, collected over time, at the early morning hours at sunrise. I have no intensions to start a self-help group or a forum for complains!
Blossoming: A Story of Beauty, Pain, Struggle & Growth
The African Environmental Blog site
The world inside my head is beautiful 🌷🌷
Videos of feral cats on the streets, and my own four feral felines at home, feline humor, advice, and gifts for your cat.
My journey to finding love through the sea Fuckboys
A blog by the Global Governance Centre, Graduate Institute, Geneva
Nicole
Cogito Ergo Sum
Sustainable Living & Wildlife Conservation
Where The Eagles Fly . . . . Art Science Poetry Music & Ideas
One minute info blogs escaping the faith trap
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t…
Mark and Abbie Jury
Life is intuition woven on fickleness.
Life is a journey. Let us meet at the intersection and share a story.
Random musings about everything.
With(out) Predicates
I call architecture frozen music. – Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Random thoughts 
Guilt aside, I find the intentional death of ANY person cruel and reprehensible. Murder is against the law. Period.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This feeling is mutual
LikeLiked by 1 person
Enjoy your weekend, my Nairobi brother!
LikeLike
You too have a fabulous weekend
LikeLiked by 1 person
Texas is a shining example of why the death penalty shouldn’t exist. While I personally think there are some very limited circumstances where the death penalty should be an option (like for contract killers), this situation illustrates why in some places even that is too much power to give governments.
LikeLike
What is the difference between a contract killer and a soldier who does the same on a large scale? A soldier who dies in war is hailed a hero regardless of what he is fighting for? Why don’t we treat them in the same way?
LikeLiked by 1 person
The initial difference between a contract killer and a soldier is that soldiers conduct lawful killings by their parent country, and it would seem that international agreements agree with that framework (like the Geneva conventions). Furthermore, it could be argued that in certain situations the capability for the international community to wage war is a necessary evil, as in against extremist nations like Nazi Germany and ISIS.
However, the notion of heroism is frequently used to deflect the issue of whether a war rises to a level of necessity (think a nation acting in self-defense, or in defense of other nations). In the U.S., we have had several wars waged over terrorism generally, but the case wasn’t made for necessity.
At any rate, I think what you’re getting at is something that I’ve been mulling over for a while. I don’t want to take up a ton of space on your blog, so I think I’ll try to flesh out what I’m talking about in a post.
LikeLike
I see no difference between the contract killer and the soldier. It all depends on who is paying and providing justification for the killing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
From a purely moral perspective, I would be inclined to agree with you. One could still justify military actions where soldiers would have to kill people. Morality would require that a nation prove the necessity of an action before initiating that action.
This leads to an interesting thought: wouldn’t it be great if, without moral justification, no military order to kill is unlawful? It would give soldiers the right to refuse to go into combat until their parent countries justify their agendas.
LikeLike
the question for me is can nations live in peace with their neighbours?
LikeLike
Texas needs the death penalty applied to it as a state. Kill it already fer Jeebus sake! I’m completely against the death penalty, and this case is one big reason why. You can’t bring back an innocent person from death to apologize for the mistake of accidentally killing them. Texas LOVES to push the button on people. The motto there is, “If ya kill enough folks, one of ’em is bound ta be guilty ‘o somethin’!”
LikeLike
that looks to be the motto. Kill em, one of them shall be the guilty one
LikeLike
This damn state.
LikeLike
so it seems
LikeLike
>>> “I think the execution of a single innocent person should be an indictment on the death penalty”
Agreed, and governments should not be allowed to commit murder – because that’s exactly what this is.
LikeLike
maybe we let governments commit murder on our behalf because we don’t want to do the dirty job ourselves
LikeLike
That’s probably true. But, why do we want murder to be committed in the first place?
LikeLike
if i could help it, only those who want to kill themselves shouldn’t be stopped from doing so but I oppose all other killings
LikeLiked by 1 person
[…] posts by Makagutu (here and here) had got me thinking about a post I wrote a while back. Granted, these posts are not about the same […]
LikeLike
I’m not sure what I think of death penalty for people where it’s absolutely certain they are guilty – but this leads to a discussion about when can we be sure.
For a person that is not certainly guilty,there shouldn’t be death penalty. The killing of an innocent person is worse than keeping a guilty person caged. If you cage a guilty person, you’re still punishing him. If you kill an innocent person intentionally, even while thinking he’s guilty, that’s murder.
LikeLike
in a previous discussion on the same matter, we said it is indeed difficult to know what we would do were we in the situation of the offended party but that it is best not to multiply murders
LikeLike
Noel my friend, I took some time to read the link article, which is an example of horrible journalism, being so badly written. I managed to understand the issue, which is an unfortunately ongoing issue of the overweight US “justice” system, which for me remains a monstrous mixture of roman law and utilitarianism. But I don’t really understand what you are saying/asking.
Is your point that they should rather let the rightly convicted live, than mistakenly execute an innocent?
LikeLike
excuse journalists, I hear most of them have very bad training.
yes, that is my point. don’t you agree that it is monstrosity to kill an innocent person whenever there is doubt about their guilt?
LikeLike
Well, well my learned friend…
Your initial statement didn’t sounded like this, but somewhat like: “rather let all the guilty live, than mistakenly kill an innocent”, of which I am totally opposed.
I would nevertheless fully agree to not kill a person until there’s even a shadow of doubt about their guilt.
Quite a bit of difference between the two statements, isn’t it?
LikeLike
Those silly people. It’s Texas. Of course the man on death row is guilty, he’s Black.
Now excuse me while I barf.
LikeLike
thanks for pointing that out. I saw that too
LikeLike