this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2026
13 points (84.2% liked)
Asklemmy
54641 readers
572 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If a person is going to continue being threat to the lives/wellbeing of others, they should be kept away from others.
If you lack the resources to keep them in an institution indefinitely, then killing them is the way you keep them away from others.
For example, a person who isnt in their right mind committing homicide because the voices in their head tell them to should be institutionalized by the government.
Whereas a billionaire pedophile should probably just be killed because they can bribe their way out of any institution/law so murder is unfortunately more likely to prevent future harm than attempting to institutionalize them
I feel like a billionaire pedophile can afford to buy a fall guy to take the death penalty for them.
Then why isnβt he paying a fall guy to take the original charges?
I mean, that was implied. CoughEpsteincough