The latest court session for Kyoto Animation arsonist Shinji Aoba continued to draw attention and controversy, baffling many with the words of Aoba’s lawyer about whether he should get the death penalty, as it barely even constituted a defense.
This time, the prosecution once again stressed the severity of the crimes committed by the arsonist, while Aoba’s defense lawyer told the jury that “whether the death penalty is chosen is an important judgment” and that they should “reconsider whether a death penalty should really be given.”
The defense further is reported to have stated, “If killing people is treated as a bad thing, why should the death penalty be justified?” and asked if ‘An eye for an eye’ was the right decision in this case.
For the long trial case, the matter of the penalty is the final section of the case to be discussed, meaning the final judgment for the case is to be decided soon. As expected, the general sentiment seems to be that the defense has basically given up on defending, instead moving to lessen the final penalty.
An eye for an eye would be to slow roast this guy over an open flame.
Problem with modern society. Its tolerance of crime. If more serious crimes were penalized in an “eye for an eye” fashion, it would be nearly biblical, how fast these serious crimes would disappear.
modern society is tolerant of crime because it’s run by criminals.
figure out the solution and who needs to implement it from there.
The solution is clear and easy, and the ones who need to implement it, are the masses. The sad truth is, they never will.
well why won’t you? get your guillotine and get to work.
Answer is yes. Most man made laws are complete jokes, but when someone deliberately kills someone they should face the same fate.
an “eye for an eye” would be to burn him alive, in contrast death penalty is a mercy gifted by the law under “humanitarian” regulations…
most of western society needs to reintroduce the death penalty, too much tax payer money being wasted on filth that will never reform, and not the “chemical” killing method but good ol hangings, people no longer fear the weight of their crimes, examples are needed.
Tbh a good ol hanging is more humane than the chemical methods. Hanging doesn’t even hurt it just snaps your spine, chemical execution mostly works but sometimes it doesn’t and boy is it unpleasant then.
DOes he needs to be executed? Yes. Painfully? Also Yes. This is a message. DO EVIL, GET EXECUTED. Simple.