What should be done to killers?

[csi]

So do people here argue that some humans are born murderers? Born muslim suicide bombers? Or born with a will to kill? Or do they agree with me that these values and actions of theirs are things they gain throughout their life experience? Sure, you can be mentally ill, genetically. Which can contribute to becoming a murderer, but is it the same with all people who are mentally ill?

Again, not an excuse for murderers but an explanation to the cause and result of their actions.

people are exposed to lots of stuff, ultimately its up to them to decide their morals and beliefs and act on them.

I apologize. I should have responded sooner.
I did not say the culture is totally responsible, only partly responsible.
It bears only a small part of the cause of this, but that does not mean it should not be addressed. Advertising works to get people to buy this or that because it makes the product look more appealing, glamorous or more effective or reliable than it actually is. Then people buy it and find out the truth. Then the people find out the product sucks. Yes, some people are more gullible and impressionable than others, but were it not for the ad, they would not have bought.

Now , that is just buying a product that doesn't work, but what about selling the idea of a lifestyle by TV? Product placement in movies and TV has been found to be effective. Not everyone is susceptible to advertising. Some people won't be swayed no matter what, but some will. We are talking about influencing people with the media, and the whole environment a person is in, to influence their actions. Since advertising works on some people, what makes you think that violent video games, and other entertainment can't?

The multiple studies that have been done on it and found there to be little causality. However if you can find some research that says our violent culture is the cause for many of these attacks I would gladly read it. I'm still waiting for you to back your statements up.

In the 80's it was rock music that made people kill, in the 90's it was rap music. I guess now its Violent Batman movies that make people kill each other.

 

[Darko99]

I didn't say you were making an excuse, just pointing out I wasn't because people repeatedly say I'm defending the murderer.

Not one factor/single thing but in my opinion EVERYTHING that people experience in life shape their thoughts, values, beliefs, actions, diets, interests etc.

Oh, no sorry I wasn't targeting you by any means. I was just putting out my opinion. I must have misread the last part of your post. Sorry.

 

[Wulf]

Oh, no sorry I wasn't targeting you by any means. I was just putting out my opinion. I must have misread the last part of your post. Sorry.

No need to apologize!

 

[NosferatuBill36]

Re: What should be done to killers?

 

[Devil_666]

^^^Agreed. Killers should be subjected to the mental torture of having to watch that piece of ____ Punisher movie.

 

[thenammagazine]

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.

 

[The Ween]

Are they still beating this dead horse?

 

[Phil Sierra]

Put him in the Brazen Bull.

 

[Darth Snoopy]

Are they still beating this dead horse?

Yup.

Some people just don't know when to quit.

 

[devilof76]

I think it's pretty obvious what should be done with murderers. The only question is how to prevent an innocent person from being executed.

There's also the question of how to do it cheaply, but I think once you have a foolproof standard for determining guilt, the basis for perpetual appeals falls flat, and then all there is to argue is propriety of sentencing. There is no argument once guilt is established beyond all reasonable doubt, but that wouldn't stop a defense lawyer looking to cash in on the crime (and the good will of people who believe that all life is precious, including the ones who destroy others').

 

[Kibishii]

Put him in solitary, try him in a court of law, give him an appeal, if said appeal fails, give him a quick and as painless as possible death. Give him the opportunity to confess his sins and apologize, don't draw it out, don't torture him, don't publicly lynch him.

As a parent who HAS buried a child, I would give absolutely anything just to have five minutes playing with my son; even if it was in a jail. My son passed away from an illness, but I can imagine how those grieving feel knowing that their children/spouses are dead and that this guy is still breathing. If found guilty in a court of law, this murderer does not deserve to spend the rest of his life sitting in a prison reading books, watching TV, and taking college classes.

 

[Bodie The Cursed]

good post bro. cant imagine the pain of your loss. ive lost a brother and came inches from losing my son. life is precious, guys like this just need to be snuffed out. no reason for their existance.

 

[Niltusk]

I think it's pretty obvious what should be done with murderers. The only question is how to prevent an innocent person from being executed.

There's also the question of how to do it cheaply, but I think once you have a foolproof standard for determining guilt, the basis for perpetual appeals falls flat, and then all there is to argue is propriety of sentencing. There is no argument once guilt is established beyond all reasonable doubt, but that wouldn't stop a defense lawyer looking to cash in on the crime (and the good will of people who believe that all life is precious, including the ones who destroy others').

The problem is just the system at times. The highest cost ongoing case in my state is an open and shut one where the man was found with his son and wifes body in a freezer and he didn't even dispose of the murder weapon. He admits what he did and says hes ready to die for what he did and then... they send him to the looney bin for the last 20 years. Every couple years he goes to court, tells the judge that hes ready to die and they say hes still too crazy to be executed even those hes been cleared as competent several times over. This guy has to go to court and say please don't execute me, so that he can be executed.

 

[devilof76]

Judiciary corrupted by a rotten legal philosophy, many decades in the making (you could call it centuries if you wanted to fully trace the roots). It is what allowed the SCOTUS to hand down their latest ruling. A is non-A. Logic is passe. Arbitration has become the abject search for a compromise between opposing points of view.

Justice is simply too judgmental for this culture. All perspectives are sacred, and the only real crime is not respecting other people's feelings.

 

[Kibishii]

Justice is simply too judgmental for this culture.

This affects all aspects of society and is one of the main issues destroying America. When it comes to 'moral' issues, the far left, everything-is-relative, bleeding heart liberals and the far right, hellfire-brimstone conservatives are the only voices heard anymore. People in either political spectrum are just blowhard bigots who get off to thinking themselves perfect.

I see this crap all the time in the classroom when a kid acts like a tyrant. You have the indulgent parent or fruity school psychologist who blames it on other students, environment, or works to get the kid a Behavior Modification Plan; this basically blames the behavior on a learning disability and makes disciplining the kid very difficult. On the other hand, you have jack-ass parents who say they want their kids to be tough or use the phrase, "Kids will be kids."

We are seeing this with people's responses on the boards right now. Some people are calling for public executions, torture, etc. Others are trying to blame it on the media, society, and trying to explain why the death penalty is unjust. This guy planned and killed many innocent people. If he is found guilty in a court of law, the only logical and available justice would be the death penalty.

Personally, I have far less patience for fruity liberals because they typically take on an "enlightened" approach while on their soap box and are in complete denial of their own redundancy. I have three people on my Block List and it is no coincidence that two of them happen to be in this thread quoting and lecturing.

 

[balboa1976]

The problem is just the system at times. The highest cost ongoing case in my state is an open and shut one where the man was found with his son and wifes body in a freezer and he didn't even dispose of the murder weapon. He admits what he did and says hes ready to die for what he did and then... they send him to the looney bin for the last 20 years. Every couple years he goes to court, tells the judge that hes ready to die and they say hes still too crazy to be executed even those hes been cleared as competent several times over. This guy has to go to court and say please don't execute me, so that he can be executed.

The system makes know sense, this guy isn't talking to the police and he knows enough to ask for a lawyer. The problem is he is 24 years old, that means that if he lives another 50 years this animal is going to cost the tax payers over a million dollars, and for what, to give this killer room and board, food, medical, dental and psychiatric treatment, most working people in this bad economy don't get that. My solution, if you catch them alive, you question them, after you get the most you can get out of them you have a panel do a review, if they are classified as know longer being part of the human race they are sent to the execution chamber, all of this is done withing within 72 hours of a mass killing. Once it's established that the individual is a monster and not fit to live anymore, you have them executed on Pay per view television with the money going to help the victims. Playing games with these animals is a waste of time, the second this monster said he was the Joker the police should have just put a bullet right between his eyes and ended him, that simple, and it's done.

The really crazy thing in society is if a dog bits someone or doesn't have someone to take care of it, we have the animal put down in an expedient fashion, but this monster gets to live on death row for 20 years or life in prison.

 

[devilof76]

Personally, I have far less patience for fruity liberals because they typically take on an "enlightened" approach while on their soap box and are in complete denial of their own redundancy. I have three people on my Block List and it is no coincidence that two of them happen to be in this thread quoting and lecturing.

Conservatives tend to have a better grasp of the American political tradition (mainly because they don't consider the country's founding to have begun with the FDR administration) but their understanding seems to come more from an emotional connection to those traditions. "It's right because my grandfather thought it was right," is not an intellectual defense. Liberals tend to have the advantage when it comes to intellectual engagement (their major stumbling block being that their ideas are frequently counter-intuitive and are about as grounded as a castle in the sky).

This is not a nation founded on Christian principles. Both sides appear to have taken that as dogma, with one championing it, and the other deriding it. Neither of them could be further from the truth. The idea that the country was founded upon came from a train of though that began with a search for a way of governing without deferring to a particular moral code. The Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius lived at the end of a period where Catholics and Protestants were slaughtering each other to guarantee that their morality was the one to gain and hold political power, and the stupidity of such an approach was obvious. Even the best conservatives today will tell you that America was successful because it was founded upon the proper morality. Liberals will point to the problems in that morality, and then the country, and conclude that the problem is moral authority as such, and then tailor an explicitly amoral legal code (ignoring the fact that their notions of economic equality are just another morality vying for control over everyone).

The epochal brilliance of the Founders was that they understood the problem as presented by Grotius, and the solution as presented by John Locke. Governments exist to preserve the individual rights of their citizens. People need to be free to discover and practice 'the good', they need to be free to reap the rewards of their success, and they need to be free to endure and learn from the pain of their failures. To be free, they need protection (or recourse) from those who would prey upon them. The Bill of Rights was written to ensure that the government could not become that predator.

(Did I miss anything?)