20% is a lot. All the families that were hurt by a terrorist attack, or even some attack, can have some relief by revenge. It makes sense.

Seems unlikely to me that 20% of the population were connected to a terrorist attack by someone who would be executed.

Even if, I don't see how seeing one of the perpetrators getting killed many years later would give relief.

I also believe eternal prison is a bigger punishment than execution.

It's not necessarily just about wanting to see someone executed. Which is worse:

- Executing people in a way that makes us not have to think about it as a society, or only think about it in passing

- Executing people in our faces, so we have to think about it

Personally I find the first option gross. "Out of sight, out of mind"--you know what I mean?

Making it public will invite the deviants who derive pleasure from the audience. Look up historical behaviours of crowds in some of the last public executions in France.

If this were livestreamed you'd have just insanely grotesque stuff like livestream commentators narrating and reacting to the footage while polymarket ads play over it, making memes and remixes of it like what happened with the Charlie Kirk assassination clips. It's all sick IMO.

Palmer Luckey had an ... interesting perspective on it. I was against it before, and I'm still against it, but his point was that the killing of a citizen is one of the largest possible flexes that a state can exercise, and to prevent against its abuse it should probably be more visible to more people

I think that there is likely _enough_ visibility in the case of the classic execution, which is only done after the fifth amendment has been thoroughly exercised and appeals process fully depleted, and (ironically) not nearly enough visibility in the exercise of state power done by drone strikes and such, and so I take his point and appreciate it for what it is, which predominately is that I hadn't thought about it in that way before -- I still oppose the idea, but perhaps less strongly than before now that I know that bloodlust isn't the only viable interest (tho still a tremendous worry to me)

I agree. I don’t want to watch it, I’d rather have no death penalty, but if the government for and by the people is okay with killing citizens then perhaps we should be facing that, not turning our backs.

Perhaps we could then rally behind getting rid of death penalty. Or at the very least, ensure we aren’t botching every other one.

Well, the sanest option is to not have the death penalty at all. Anything is trying to make the problem work.

Except the execution wasn't being presented as a somber recognition of the brutalism of the death penalty, but a celebration of vengeance.

Everyone who is for the death penalty should be legally obligated to watch every single execution.

1. Practically speaking, what's the intended effect, given that executions nowadays are pretty sanitized anyways? Lethal injection is basically equivalent to some guy going under anesthesia.

2. Do you actually believe in the implied principle of "if you support [x] you must watch every [x]", or are you just using it a cudgel against people you hate? Would it be fair game for anti-abortion groups to demand "if you support abortion you must watch every abortion"?

While we are at it, Can we have all non-vegetarians watch all the slaughter houses?

seems fair. As a meat eater I am for it