Secretary Hogsweat's live streamed public execution

[stryder]

I wouldn't think it right to have an execution broadcast mainly due to laws against "Snuff".

The age of the viewing audience would be awkward to limit too, especially if its "Trump" endorsed, however are parents going to say no to their kids when the president supports it.

There is already enough sicko's out there attempting to get people to kill for their entertainment, rewarding them with a public display doesn't really suggest that they are wrong.

Does it actually teach people anything about what happens as a consequence? I'm pretty sure anyone that does the act that the guy did probably didn't really care about the outcome. In fact he's probably waiting on that instance of just before being shot to shout some statement at the cameras.

But why stop with just televised executions, why not televised torture sessions? how about re-enacting skinning a person alive? how about crushing them under stones or stoning them? (Oh hang on, thats literally turning into Iran isn't it)

[Syne]

No, you'll just watch bloodletting on behalf of the left.

One is a tragic news event. The other is a staged appeasement of some assumed American desire to see felons being killed. My guess is that hardly anyone will watch the execution.

One was a news event, where you could avoid seeing the death... if you wanted to.

No traditional news outlets broadcasted or published graphic imagery or video of Charlie Kirk’s actual death. Following his assassination on September 10, 2025, major television networks and traditional news organizations intentionally exercised caution in their coverage.

So you had to seek it out on social media.

While established news gatekeepers filtered out the explicit imagery, the graphic, uncensored video of the shooting was widely available on social media. Multi-angle, slow-motion, and real-time speed videos of the fatal neck wound circulated almost instantly across platforms like X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, and Truth Social, where millions of people viewed them directly.

But you probably do get all your news from social media. 9_9


Public state executions have always been a means of deterrent, not appeasing any supposed bloodlust.

[Magical Realist]

One was a news event, where you could avoid seeing the death... if you wanted to.

I never saw Kirk getting shot as that was not aired on the news. That's where I get my news from. The TV news.

[Syne]

One was a news event, where you could avoid seeing the death... if you wanted to.

I never saw Kirk getting shot...

Liar:

Did you watch Kirk get shot?

Yep..but that wasn't a govt-sponsored public execution either.

[Magical Realist]

I watched the event of the shooting, not the actual killing of Kirk. The TV news apparently has a standard of tastefulness that is all but lost on the White House.

[Syne]

I wouldn't think it right to have an execution broadcast mainly due to laws against "Snuff". 

The age of the viewing audience would be awkward to limit too, especially if its "Trump" endorsed, however are parents going to say no to their kids when the president supports it.

Public executions are not "snuff films."

A snuff film is a purported or actual video genre depicting the real, premeditated murder of a person, often made for financial gain, distribution, or entertainment.

Public executions are not classified as snuff films. While both involve a real person dying on camera, they differ fundamentally in their purpose, legality, and production context.

Key Differences

Authority and Intent: Public executions are carried out by a state or governing authority as an official punishment under that jurisdiction's legal system. Snuff films, by definition, depict autonomous, illegal criminal homicides.

The Commercial Element: True snuff films are defined by their intent to be distributed commercially or privately for illicit entertainment or financial gain. Historical public executions (and modern recordings of state executions) are intended for public viewing, news reporting, or official record-keeping, rather than commercial entertainment.

Media Classification: While archival or news footage of a public execution shows real death, media scholars and criminologists classify it as historical documentation or news media, not a snuff film.
-gemini

Many platforms already restrict violence and death... even though many of those same platforms allowed footage of Kirk's death to be shared very widely and, initially, without age warnings.

Because of these platform restrictions and an Army regulation that strictly bars minors under 18 from witnessing military executions, officials are navigating how a public broadcast can legally occur. The Pentagon routinely broadcasts its own official events through government-hosted websites, such as the Department of War website, which remain the most likely alternative if commercial social media platforms refuse to host the stream.
- gemini

No, parents are not any more likely to let children watch just because they are Trump supporters. That guilt by association fallacy is a sign of your TDS.

There is already enough sicko's out there attempting to get people to kill for their entertainment, rewarding them with a public display doesn't really suggest that they are wrong.

Would such sickos not already have access to much more graphic examples? Or... are you speaking from personal knowledge? @_@

Does it actually teach people anything about what happens as a consequence?  I'm pretty sure anyone that does the act that the guy did probably didn't really care about the outcome.  In fact he's probably waiting on that instance of just before being shot to shout some statement at the cameras.

There's a difference between suicide, or suicide by cop, during your attack and facing the prolonged dread of an execution. If anything, maybe it will encourage such people to not be "taken alive" and save us all a lot of time, prosecution, appeals, and prison housing and care.
Why would we allow him to speak?

Since he's Muslim, we should grease the bullets in pig fat.

But why stop with just televised executions, why not televised torture sessions? how about re-enacting skinning a person alive?  how about crushing them under stones or stoning them?  (Oh hang on, thats literally turning into Iran isn't it)

Um... because we don't torture. But maybe you don't understand the difference. @_@

---

I watched the event of the shooting, not the actual killing of Kirk.

Liar:

Did you watch Kirk get shot?

Yep..but that wasn't a govt-sponsored public execution either.

Or is this just your rampant illiteracy again? @_@

[Magical Realist]

LOL Dumbfuck all upset that he couldn't catch me on something.

[Syne]

LOL Dumbfuck all upset that he couldn't catch me on something.

Did you watch Kirk get shot?

Yep..but that wasn't a govt-sponsored public execution either.

I never saw Kirk getting shot...

Desperately trying to deflect from the obvious contradiction, lie, or just plain illiteracy.

9_9


Or... do you really still not comprehend simple English enough to even see the obvious contradiction? @_@

[Magical Realist]

Desperately trying

Yeah we know. You must go thru withdrawal symptoms if you go without catching me at something for too long.

[Syne]

Desperately trying

Yeah we know. You must go thru withdrawal symptoms if you go without catching me at something for too long.

So a liar (or functionally illiterate) AND a hypocrite... quoting partial sentences after you've whined about others doing it.

Yep, that all fits with your demonstrated ethics.