Brandon O’Quinn Rasberry, 32, was shot in the head in 2022 while he slept at an RV park in Nixon, Texas, about 60 miles (97 kilometers) east of San Antonio, investigators said. He had just moved in a few days before.
The boy’s possible connection to the case was uncovered after sheriff’s deputies were contacted on April 12 of this year about a student who threatened to assault and kill another student on a school bus. They learned the boy had made previous statements that he had killed someone two years ago.
The boy was taken to a child advocacy center, where he described for interviewers details of Rasberry’s death “consistent with first-hand knowledge” of the crime, investigators said.
The scope is far greater than eye for an eye. While they’ll never be able to undo what they did, there is a possibility that they may make positive contributions to society. Contributions that could save multiple lives. That’s not even going into the problems of allowing a state to ritualistically murder people.
What if we measure that some people make a negative contribution to society ?
I don’t mean criminals even, just people who are for a reason or another, a net loss, and we know for sure.
You’ll always have people who are a net loss. That’s the whole point of living in a society, to overcome together and take care of those that cannot take care of themselves. If everyone was self sufficient, we never would have joined together to be the herd animals that we are.
“The measure of a civilization is how it treats its weakest members.”
This.
Then talk of rehabilitation because they might make a positive contribution undermines that.
I disagree that it undermines that at all. Some people are able to be rehabilitated, some aren’t. Aside from that, are you trying to say that because someone is a net loss to society they should just be cast aside?
In addition, rehabilitation, like other complex psychological things like grief, is not a linear nor fully understood thing. Someone exhibiting anti-social behavior may not be able to be rehabilitated at a given time due to many possible factors, be it intrinsic to the individual or collective knowledge. Even if one cannot be safely re-integrated into society, there are ways that they can voluntarily contribute and likely would choose to, even if it were for selfish reasons (ex. many serial killers are aware that there is something profoundly wrong with them and happy to contribute data to prevent others or get their names in books).
If you don’t want people to compare this to Naziism, perhaps don’t just reinvent the concept of “useless eaters.”
I’m sorry, but the logic is built in to
“While they’ll never be able to undo what they did, there is a possibility that they may make positive contributions to society. Contributions that could save multiple lives.”
When used as a justification to oppose
“I always wonder why people think murderers are “worth saving”. My guy stole someone’s entire life, why should he get to have one and have special attention made to it?”