Hacker News Reader

Comment by freerobby | Hacker News Reader

> He failed to do any that you are aware of

The whole premise of this piece is that the author went along with a broken system because "that's the way it's supposed to work" -- that people on the inside oil the machine and people on the outside look the other way, and both are to blame for their part in it.

The author bends over backwards throughout to show that he was no exception, that he went right along with it, and he seems to regret that now. If evidence to the contrary is available, I'm all ears.

> with regards to this single issue of many that affect his facility.

Well yeah, but "this single issue" is the premise of the article, a major social issue, and the topic of discussion here. I'm not saying this guy shirked his moral duties all throughout life; I'm saying he shirked them on capital punishment.

View on HN

I think that had he, as warden, resigned/publicly opposed the executions they still would have happened. I think that as warden, he has many other opportunities for reform within his prison. I therefore don't think that he has a moral obligation to resign/publicly oppose the executions. We live in a society of broken systems. If we have to protest every wrongdoing that we encounter, we wouldn't be able to get anything done.

As to the warden's own lack of "the faintest sacrifice to oppose it" and "bending over backwards". What do you consider an appropriate sacrifice for an ordinary citizen who opposes capital punishment? Campaigning for more progressive political leaders? Communicating with state officials? How do you know he did none of these things? I don't have evidence that he did but neither do you have evidence that he didn't. I don't understand the condemnation of this individual you know only through an op-ed.

Public opinion is turning on capital punishment[1]. Anything those with power can do to draw attention to its failures will continue and further that momentum. Yeah, those two guys were probably going to be executed either way, but he could have impacted others by accelerating the pace of reform. Similar impact has been made elsewhere in the last decade, in states like Illinois where moratoriums have been imposed when officials and governors have come to their senses before the lawmakers.

In terms of what an appropriate sacrifice is, I suppose there's a pretty wide spectrum. At the extreme, he could've publicly resigned and refused to have any part in something so unethical. On the lighter end, he could've penned an op/ed stating that it's a terrible practice but that he's going to stay and do his part to make it as comfortable as possible for the condemned, while calling on lawmakers to end the practice. I'm not prescriptive about how exactly people should react when their ethics are challenged, but I think it's reasonable to ask them to wander in the direction of their moral compass even when their job points the other way.[2]

[1] http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/16/less-support-for-deat...

[2] Obviously, some people would be hurting for work if they lost their job, and cannot afford to take big risks or piss off their bosses. But that doesn't apply to prison wardens, and if anything, the imperative of a prison warden to have solid ethics is much higher than that of a typical worker.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com