>>>>>I'm against death penalty in general. And punishment too. But then I'm not an American, where such odd ideas are wide spread. Nobody will learn from it, it will prevent nothing. Removing them out of society is a different matter. And let them life long work to pay the victims bills too. Don't know. In a sense abusers are pitiful humans that lack basic parts that makes us human. But then this is a disability. One that makes it impossible to live under general society, and there is no secure cure - but still they have the right to live.
>>>>
>>>>Sorry - the fellow threatened to kill sibilings, wife, aunt. People claim threat of death is no prevention to them, but it works on the rational. That only proves these offenders are beyond saving. You are against the death penalty because you have not seen these sickos up close. We spend too much in taxes to keep them in jail. Punishment cannot work without drastic physical interventions. I was prepared to punch him in the throat for how he used me and I was prepared to kill the shotgun wielder. If that is toxic masculinity it is better to end their toxicity than to allow it to continue. Right to live when it is wrong is illogical.
>>>
>>>It starts with the wrongness off punishment at alland ends up with the denial of the right to live. What ever your feelings are - civilization starts where one comes over it. The being you are talking about was unable to come over his feelings. Do you need to be on the same level? Just follow your feelings (and you had good reasons for feeling bad) does not make you right. It just makes you a murder too. To not do it is all the difference there is.
>>
>>Civilization begins where criminals end. It is not murder to terminate a murderer. Simple logic. I am at a higher level to recognize the futility of caring for these animals.
>>
>>>I really like those whining about taxes. Your country is rich enough to deal with it. It's peanuts. There are other places where money is wasted in a much higher scale.
>>
>>No country is rich enough to rip of their constituents.
>>
>>>
>>>The problem with the right to live is not the extrema, it's the boundary. How do you define the step from where it is illogical to survive? Maybe you have a look over ideas a century ago what is worth to live (Was common. Not genuine German). My grandparents and there generation developed the idea to force that. Chronification of depression was enough, vagrancy too, not to mention the more known ideas of superior life. A country that was known for high culture needed less then a decade for this movement of boundaries. Civilisation is a very thin coating. And shows up how we deal with the worst.
>>>Murdering the offender seems to solve all problems. One does not need to care about any more, the feelings are satisfied. How archaic.
>>
>>The archaic is subjecting others to the potential harm of these animals. Exposing innocents to murderers is exactly like the Roman Coliseum throwing people to the lions.
>
>Naming any human being an animal brings this filament short to reach Godwin's law. I quit.

If you think all human beings are not animals you are very optimistic.