The death penalty has various serious problems and lifetime imprisonment is really really expensive.
I guess we should be happy every time someone so thoroughly bad we want them out of society forever (like a serial murderer) does us the favour of killing themselves. Nothing of value is lost, and the justice system saves money. Right?
It seems to me it logically follows that we should incentivize such suicides. Like: 5000 dollars to a person of your choice if you're dead within the first year of your lifetime sentence, wink, wink, nudge, nudge.
It feels very wrong and is clearly outside the overton window. But is there any reason to expect this wouldn't be a net benefit?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I think you have a flawed theory of natural rights if you think being killed by your declared ennemies is something abnormal.
There is no such thing as a right to life. Because nature doesn't afford any such right without the existence of the State. All that God provides is a right to defend yourself against the State to the death if they want to kill you. Nothing more.
Now of course the government doesn't own you. It's impossible to own a human or anything that has a will in any coherent sense. But we kill things we don't own all the time, through war, property has nothing to do with it, unless you want to think of justice or victory as a form of slavery, which is in fact the sort of barbaric view I do not condone.
I don't think you understand what totalitarianism is if you think that I'm one or that supporting the death penalty has anything to do with it.
Was the British Empire totalitarian? How about France up until the 80s? What about ancient Greece?
We'll have to disagree. If you believe that it is just some die, kill them. If you do not, don't. Asking others to do the job and calling it free will is silly business.
More options
Context Copy link