Those aren't places whose approach to justice the US should emulate. Civilized governments did away with public execution a century ago²

In fact, one argument I recently have used in support of the war with Iran is that the Islamic Republic still holds public executions.

¹ https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-where-public-e...

² https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_execution

this public execution buys implied consent to execute 'enemies' of the state. it also forces state governors aligned with the president to livestream executions of those on death row as 'deterrent'. then later go execute enemies of the state.

however as most people know through projects like the innocence project - some people on deathrow are innocent but are victims of racism etc.

And now my country is implementing that for real.

"People need to understand that there's serious consequences for these types of things."

Why? Seriously, what is the point of demonstrating "serious consequences" for the crime of "military personnel mass-shooting other military personnel"? Is this a regular problem that needs to be corrected for? Do you think anyone in their right mind _doesn't_ already understand that there will be serious consequences for such an action? And if they're not in their right mind, exactly how do you think this will improve deterrence?

What an utterly boneheaded statement.

The US is a representative democracy and "we" have delegated the monopolistic use of violence to the government.

If the government is going to capitally punish someone, it ought to be done in full view of the people from whom the power to do so derives.

That is the opposite of a tyranny.

A fitting end for an utter monster.

if the guy really committed a terrorist attack killing 10 people in betrayal of his fellow military personnel, I passively don't find a public execution via firing squad to be any more barbaric than the crime he inflicted upon others

Public executions are said to build community via promoting an open commitment to justice, to encourage transparency in government, and mostly to act as a deterrent to crime.

I have not seen the comments say why public executions went away in many places, which was in part due to the potential of crowds to devolve into riots and spectacle. If this public execution ends up having that kind of effect, they might for practical reasons end up being discontinued again.