Fort Hood Shooter’s Execution to be Live-Streamed

[BB]

This isn't a huge deal, states routinely allow civilian and media witnesses to observe executions. it is a volunteer process usually. Viewing this Livestream will be a volunteer process. I doubt it will be graphic, and perhaps there will be an age check.

Also lots of folks now like to claim they are citizen journalists, auditors, etc.... well now they are getting that chance on a mass scale. Go watch the process if you like or not. This isn't compulsory viewing.

[ProudVirgin69]

This isn't a huge deal, states routinely allow civilian and media witnesses to observe executions. it is a volunteer process usually. Viewing this Livestream will be a volunteer process. I doubt it will be graphic, and perhaps there will be an age check.

Also lots of folks now like to claim they are citizen journalists, auditors, etc.... well now they are getting that chance on a mass scale. Go watch the process if you like or not. This isn't compulsory viewing.

It is quite a departure from existing protocol, actually.  States allow a small number of media representatives (less than 10, typically) to witness, and there is no recording of the execution.  Broadcasting it for mass consumption is wholly unprecedented in our country.

[ProudVirgin69]

Good to hear

The west has become a bunch of pussies

In China they still have public executions primarily for sex offenders and murderers

China ended public executions almost 20 years ago, in 2007.  Even Saudi Arabia ended public executions in 2022, because they both determined that they foster more anti-government sentiment and invite international criticism than the "benefits" they provide.

I’m not sure rolling a paraplegic out in his wheelchair and shooting him to death on a livestream is going to have the effect Hegseth is going for, personally.

[BB]

It is quite a departure from existing protocol, actually.  States allow a small number of media representatives (less than 10, typically) to witness, and there is no recording of the execution.  Broadcasting it for mass consumption is wholly unprecedented in our country.

Federally, it's 6 witnesses for convicted, 8 general, and 10 media. Here's the breakdown - https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/26.4 . It's not done that way not so much for moral reasons, but logistical. They don't want enough people there to disrupt anything, and because of space concerns.

Most states allow a civilians also.

Just as an aside, on the state level in America (and on a country level in France), one of the main drivers of abandonment of public executions years ago was from a logistics side. They were high annoyance, little upside events.

I just don't see it as a huge deal, it's not compulsory. They aren't forcing anyone to watch. It's just a modernization of the process. The one sticking point that has merit is the "no under 18" rule, but that can be overcome with a internet based age check or similar.

[joswift]

it wont happen, its just a smoke screen for the mid-terms

[Irongrip400]

1. Treason

2. Murdered 13, wounded more than 30 on a Federal military base (Fort Hood) and yelled "Allahu Akbar" during the attack.

3. He was waging jihad to protect the Taliban....as a US Soldier on a US Military (in case you didn't get it) - see #1

4. We haven't had a military firing squad execution in since WWII. It should be live-streamed to show Radical Islam what's in store for them.

5. The difference between us and a third world country is that they do this every fucking day...in a public square.

6. Don't like, don't watch it. I'm quite sure this won't be broadcasted on network or cable TV but through specific livestream platforms.

7. I don't a give fuck what your reasoning is.

I’m on board with this dude getting smoked. Shit, that he’s been alive this long after is tragic, they should’ve fed him through a whole tree grinder years ago (I’m serious w out that, pedos too) but we should be above this type of thing. It’s all bread and circus.

[Dave D]

It is quite a departure from existing protocol, actually.  States allow a small number of media representatives (less than 10, typically) to witness, and there is no recording of the execution.  Broadcasting it for mass consumption is wholly unprecedented in our country.

True.New technologies create new opportunities. Live broadcasts on tv and streaming isnt comparing apples to apples.

[chaos]

Pay per view it and donate the money to the victims families.

[illuminati]

I’m on board with this dude getting smoked. Shit, that he’s been alive this long after is tragic, they should’ve fed him through a whole tree grinder years ago (I’m serious w out that, pedos too) but we should be above this type of thing. It’s all bread and circus.

What do you mean we should be above this type of thing ??

[ProudVirgin69]

Federally, it's 6 witnesses for convicted, 8 general, and 10 media. Here's the breakdown - https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/26.4 . It's not done that way not so much for moral reasons, but logistical. They don't want enough people there to disrupt anything, and because of space concerns.

Most states allow a civilians also.

Just as an aside, on the state level in America (and on a country level in France), one of the main drivers of abandonment of public executions years ago was from a logistics side. They were high annoyance, little upside events.

I just don't see it as a huge deal, it's not compulsory. They aren't forcing anyone to watch. It's just a modernization of the process. The one sticking point that has merit is the "no under 18" rule, but that can be overcome with a internet based age check or similar.

As previously stated, there’s quite a bit of difference between the small number of individuals previously allowed to witness an execution, and live-streaming it to the general public.

True.New technologies create new opportunities. Live broadcasts on tv and streaming isnt comparing apples to apples.

Functionally speaking, what’s the difference? 

[BB]

As previously stated, there’s quite a bit of difference between the small number of individuals previously allowed to witness an execution, and live-streaming it to the general public.
 

Ok, explain to me why it's so much better or worse to have 8 civilian witnesses vs 800 vs 8000, etc.... ? You have free will not to partake. Having civilian witnesses is an allowed thing. If you don't want people to see it, then ban it or just don't sentence people to death. But to argue that it's so much worse because it is livestreamed is horseshit.

Heck, one could even argue that it is more respectful to the process to watch the thing because we (the majority of the citizenry) are putting aside our queasiness to see that the justice we voted for is done. If you are going to allow the judicial killing of someone, you should at least have the balls to watch it to understand what you have signed on for.

[Never1AShow]

First of all there's no justice here because justice would be him being killed 13 times, and then also injured 30 times commensurate with his actions.  Second, there are very good reasons to make it public and livestream, transparency, finality, showing the death penalty actually does occur without 30+ years of appeals and delay (see botched execution lady), showing the public that this is society's choice, depussification of America, depussification of  the military, restoration of some modicum of trust to government to actually do what it said.  You may not agree with them, but just ignoring them isn't honest.

[Coach is Back!]

.

[Van_Bilderass]

it wont happen, its just a smoke screen for the mid-terms

Yeah I'm sure it won't happen, too many negatives and the rest of the admin will object. If I'm wrong I'll eat crow.

JD Vance immediately sort of came out against it. I don't like the dude but he sounded pretty presidential here.

If Hegseth was one of the shooters he could show that he's actually tough and not just an actor.

1. Treason

2. Murdered 13, wounded more than 30 on a Federal military base (Fort Hood) and yelled "Allahu Akbar" during the attack.

3. He was waging jihad to protect the Taliban....as a US Soldier on a US Military (in case you didn't get it) - see #1

4. We haven't had a military firing squad execution in since WWII. It should be live-streamed to show Radical Islam what's in store for them.

5. The difference between us and a third world country is that they do this every fucking day...in a public square.

6. Don't like, don't watch it. I'm quite sure this won't be broadcasted on network or cable TV but through specific livestream platforms.

7. I don't a give fuck what your reasoning is.

I know it was treason, an unimaginably horrible act. He was supposed to treat soldiers but killed them instead.

"Radical Islam" want to die. Ever hear of suicide bombers? This guy probably expected to be killed in the attack. This would be a great recruiting tool. Remember what they did to Bin Laden, how they buried him? They didn't make a spectacle of it. They didn't publicize photos.

(as an aside, somewhat O/T: when Al Qaeda isn't killing U.S. civilians they are working for the U.S. ISIS, same thing)

I saw a bunch of SF operators all come out against it, for multiple reasons. It's interesting especially considering SF operators are all psychopaths.

Someone calling himself legalnerd posted this; I'm not in a position to evaluate whether it's correct.

[Van_Bilderass]

The pope and other senior Church officials just keep doing things Coach doesn't like.

[BB]

Someone calling himself legalnerd posted this; I'm not in a position to evaluate whether it's correct.

Pages 6-8 - https://api.army.mil/e2/c/downloads/2024/08/16/264d455f/ar-190-55-u-s-army-corrections-system-procedures-for-military-execution.pdf .

I see nothing that would preclude live streaming.

They had a bunch of Yale and Harvard law professors look this over for the news networks. The only real path they saw was the "no one under 18" rule.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/legal-path-seems-narrow-to-challenge-livestream-of-fort-hood-shooters-execution-experts-say .