Heavy Metal frontman deserves to be severely punished!

[Deathstroke]

I've never heard of this band before, but the frontman is in some SERIOUS trouble and I hope he gets what he deserves.

News Story (http://www.roadrun.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=55167)

[ocelotrevs]

Terrible, and they even promoted the bands new album as well.

[Adam Crocker]

"This second week of July 2006 was the last week of existence of THEE PLAGUE OF GENTLEMEN. Front man Steve [McMillan] has been arrested and imprisoned for criminal acts that none of the members could ever imagine to happen and which are totally unacceptable. Therefore we all disassociate ourselves from all his acts, deeds and comments.

"At this very moment, we need to digest the facts, but one thing is sure: THEE PLAGUE OF GENTLEMEN is no more.

"Time will tell what the future will bring."

Arguably the only thing they could have done with the band given their frontman's actions. I just hope it doesn't ruin their music careers as a whole.

[Athena Bast]

Terrible, and they even promoted the bands new album as well.

Promoted an album that they only started tracking and will never finish.

[Ontir]

The guy is definitely scum, and needs to be put away. I can't go along with the calls for state-sponsored murder, though.

[Deathstroke]

The guy is definitely scum, and needs to be put away. I can't go along with the calls for state-sponsored murder, though.

I can, but then I'm a bastard.

[Ontir]

I can, but then I'm a bastard.

You've always seemed rather nice to me, I just don't go in for the death penalty.

[Josh S]

The guy is definitely scum, and needs to be put away. I can't go along with the calls for state-sponsored murder, though.


Agreed.

...

[Deathstroke]

You've always seemed rather nice to me, I just don't go in for the death penalty.

I am generally a nice guy, but when riled, I'm quite bloodthirsty.

[Ontir]

I'll have to ask my sister-in-law to be certain, but I don't think Belgium even has the death penalty. Most European nations don't have it, and I think it's absence is part of the EU human rites charter business. It seems to me, that was something that Turkey's been dealing with over the last few years, though I could be mistaken.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Times like these I wish there was really a Punisher to meek out justice to deplorable assholes like this scumbag. I look and imagine what a Frank Castle would do in this situtation thats truelly vengence.

[Ontir]

Vengeance isn't justice, and as Ghandi said, an eye for an eye leaves the world blind. He shold be held accountable for his crimes, and removed from society, where he would continue his atrocities. All of that can be done, without committing acts that make society his equal.

[Hiromi]

Vengeance isn't justice, and as Ghandi said, an eye for an eye leaves the world blind. He shold be held accountable for his crimes, and removed from society, where he would continue his atrocities. All of that can be done, without committing acts that make society his equal.

Eh, I'd point out that under eye for an eye he'd be getting a lot worse than a clean execution, but not the place and stuff, so to each his own.

But the fact that this guy is about the lowest form of human scum you can get I don't think's debateble.

[Deathstroke]

Someone edited my thread title.

[Ontir]

Stroke,

I wondered about that.

Hiromi,

I agree, he absolutely is scum.

[Adam Crocker]

Vengeance isn't justice, and as Ghandi said, an eye for an eye leaves the world blind. He shold be held accountable for his crimes, and removed from society, where he would continue his atrocities. All of that can be done, without committing acts that make society his equal.

Arguably though execution is cleaner than say...visiting his crimes on him repeatedly, and possibly more humane. Of course the other side to this is that execution is not simply vengeance. It's defending society by removing the most irredeemable and dangerous elements. I'm not enthusiastic about it myself, but I do agree with the logic in applying it to serial killers, rapists, and like who are more than likely to repeat their crimes and continue grievously harming others.

[Deathstroke]

Stroke,

I wondered about that.


Yeah I said he should be killed. I'm not too happy about the editing.

[Buried Alien]

Yeah I said he should be killed. I'm not too happy about the editing.

Regardless, it's against CBR rules to have thread titles that advocate for the death of any person, no matter how despicable and deserving that person is.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Moderator Alive!)

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Vengeance isn't justice, and as Ghandi said, an eye for an eye leaves the world blind. He shold be held accountable for his crimes, and removed from society, where he would continue his atrocities. All of that can be done, without committing acts that make society his equal.


Ghandi had peaceful revolution. This son of a bitch deserves what he's gonna recieve in jail. Sorry , guys like this don't deserve the Ghandi treatment.

[Deathstroke]

Regardless, it's against CBR rules to have thread titles that advocate for the death of any person, no matter how despicable and deserving that person is.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Moderator Alive!)

Okay, I seem to have missed that rule. I apologize for the unintended rule breaking.

[Ontir]

Ghandi had peaceful revolution. This son of a bitch deserves what he's gonna recieve in jail. Sorry , guys like this don't deserve the Ghandi treatment.


The point is, that everyone deserves to be treated properly. No matter how heinous their offense, they're still sentient human beings. Also, how we treat others reflects who we are, ourselves.

[Ilash]

The point is, that everyone deserves to be treated properly. No matter how heinous their offense, they're still sentient human beings. Also, how we treat others reflects who we are, ourselves.

Um, maybe it's just me but it looks like this thread is pretty close to becoming all about the death penalty so shouldn't it go to the community forum?

Anyway, while I am personally pretty torn on the matter of the death penalty, I just can't readily agree with what you're saying. I can't help but not really give much of a damn about the rights of a freakin' child raper regardless of whether or not he's a "sentient human being".

[SUPERECWFAN1]

The point is, that everyone deserves to be treated properly. No matter how heinous their offense, they're still sentient human beings. Also, how we treat others reflects who we are, ourselves.


Not pedophiles who rape little kids . And I don't think your gonna see many here preach about how it reflects on us as people wanting this guy to suffer.

Ghandi here is just wrong. The guy opposed a Government. Not a pedophile who abused children.

[Ontir]

He opposed the mistreatment of people, which is why he was also imprisoned in South Africa at one point.

There's dealing with something properly, and then there's becoming what you abhor, and justifying it with semantics.

[Buried Alien]

Um, maybe it's just me but it looks like this thread is pretty close to becoming all about the death penalty so shouldn't it go to the community forum?

I agree. The musical aspect of this discussion is tangential at best.

Away we go...


Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[SUPERECWFAN1]

He opposed the mistreatment of people, which is why he was also imprisoned in South Africa at one point.

How many pedophiles and murders did he say deserve to not be mis-treated ?

There's dealing with something properly, and then there's becoming what you abhor, and justifying it with semantics.

No theres Justice and ruining a young childs life. Taking their innocense away. If thats the case when those children grow up and need to see a shrink to deal with the issues and are shattered , I'm wondering if the parents will think of Ghandi and hope the pedophile is treated " Ok " where he's at.

If I was a parent I sure as hell wouldn't be thinking of Ghandi or Mother Teresa about this guy.

[Spike-X]

Here we go again...

[Ontir]

Look, what happened to the children is horrible, no one's disputing that, but torturing their attacker isn't going to change what's been done. Nothing short of a time machine will do that. As for Ghandi, you should read what he said, along with people like Zinn, and Chomsky.

You're not talking about justice, you're talking about revenge. That's a VERY different thing.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Look, what happened to the children is horrible, no one's disputing that, but torturing their attacker isn't going to change what's been done. Nothing short of a time machine will do that. As for Ghandi, you should read what he said, along with people like Zinn, and Chomsky.

You're not talking about justice, you're talking about revenge. That's a VERY different thing.

Prison isn't good on pedophiles. His hell is awaiting him. The treatment he gets in jail is worth it. The ever lasting nightmare is ahead for him and I don't feel for him at all.

Its not revenge. He deserves the hell he has brought down on himself. Justice be done.

[Ontir]

Prisons in Europe are quite the same as in the States. The inmates don't actually run things there. While imprisonment isn't desireable, it's not quite the same hell that he'd be facing in this country. Here, he'd be tortured and possibly killed, or he'd be in protected custody, which is far more isolating, and not always much safer.

[Mike Smash!]

The guy is definitely scum, and needs to be put away. I can't go along with the calls for state-sponsored murder, though.

I'm with you. Yes, he's human filth and he deserves to be locked up for the rest of his life, but I won't join the lynch mob. Nobody deserves to be murdered.

And we need to reform our prison system so that people aren't raped, beaten or killed behind bars.

Put him in his orange jumpsuit and let him rot behind bars. Like Ontir said, there's a difference between justice and vengeance and the act of killing this man does nothing more than demean us rather than punish him.

[Noah Johnson]

Between 5 and 7? Jesus H. Christ. That's some hardcore despicable all right.

And, nice as usual to see how many people remain opposed to the basic concept of human rights.

[Ontir]

I appreciate the back-up. It's easy for people to generalize about what someone deserves if they've never set foot in a prison, but if you have (and I think God I was only visiting!), you know what a horrific experience it is. No one deserves to be forced to live in those conditions, and getting cable doesn't make a dent in the inhumanity!

There's also the oft-ingored reality, which is that in general, inmates are going to be released, because they weren't ever eligible for the death penalty, even in kill-happy states like Texas. The current prison systems tend to take the worst society has to offer, and then turn them into more effective predators. That's something to consider when wishing hell upon someone.

[Deathstroke]

Please lock this thread per request of me who started the thread in the Music Forum.

Thank you.

[JeffreyWKramer]

I appreciate the back-up. It's easy for people to generalize about what someone deserves if they've never set foot in a prison, but if you have (and I think God I was only visiting!), you know what a horrific experience it is. No one deserves to be forced to live in those conditions, and getting cable doesn't make a dent in the inhumanity!


I've worked in prisons. Yep, they do suck, but there are plenty of people who deserve to be there.

I also believe there are some people who should be put to death, for the simple reason of societal self-defense. This particular guy qualifies.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

I appreciate the back-up. It's easy for people to generalize about what someone deserves if they've never set foot in a prison, but if you have (and I think God I was only visiting!), you know what a horrific experience it is. No one deserves to be forced to live in those conditions, and getting cable doesn't make a dent in the inhumanity!

He deserves to be there. Thats his justice. Thats where he's going and where Gary Glitter is begging to get out of a forgien prison now.

There's also the oft-ingored reality, which is that in general, inmates are going to be released, because they weren't ever eligible for the death penalty, even in kill-happy states like Texas. The current prison systems tend to take the worst society has to offer, and then turn them into more effective predators. That's something to consider when wishing hell upon someone.

And again its the Justice system here. We really have no clue how hard or what he'll get overseas. But I've heard where Glitter is at is a tough prison on pedophiles so...I wonder what he'll get.

[Mike Smash!]

I've worked in prisons. Yep, they do suck, but there are plenty of people who deserve to be there.

I also believe there are some people who should be put to death, for the simple reason of societal self-defense. This particular guy qualifies.And I know we disagree on this, Jeffrey.

I think by killing a person in a helpless situation, we are dragging ourselves down to the level of a murderer. His death will not un-rape those children and unlike the Marvel Universe, the chance of his escape is not likely.

Speaking as someone who was a victim of sexual abuse, killing him undoes no crime, comforts no one and putting the victims' families through an endless appeals process forces to relive the crimes for years. And even from a monetary standpoint, it's just cheaper to keep him alives and imprisoned indefinitely.

Put him in solitary. Put the fucker in a jumpsuit and never let him breathe free air again. Killing him only incites a bloodthirst in people who have nothing to do with the case and demeans us all.

There's never been proof that killing him deters crime and there's no reason to retain the death penalty for any other reason that simply visceral satisfaction of killing a "bad guy".

[SUPERECWFAN1]

I've worked in prisons. Yep, they do suck, but there are plenty of people who deserve to be there.

I also believe there are some people who should be put to death, for the simple reason of societal self-defense. This particular guy qualifies.


See I agree. If you do a crime that is so henious and its really taking 5 to 7 yearolds innocense away and shattering them , then yeah...you deserve what you brought. You deserve to face an angry prison population. The fact that they have 4 victims as of now and suspect him of more pedophile behavior towards children show he's an s.o.b.


I believe in the Death Penalty and as the great thespian Ron White said : " I believe in the Death Penalty and in Texas...we use it! "

[JeffreyWKramer]

There's never been proof that killing him deters crime and there's no reason to retain the death penalty for any other reason that simply visceral satisfaction of killing a "bad guy".

No, there's the very simple reason that dead people don't ever kill anyone else. It's not a matter of deterrence, or of undoing the crime. Those are indeed bogus reasons. It's a simple matter of societal self-defense.

In reality, people do escape from time to time, and when these sorts of people escape, they cause a great deal of harm, in addition to the harm they've already caused. Better they not have any opportunity at all.

To me, it's the equivalent of putting down a rabid dog.

[Phrozen]

As for Ghandi, you should read what he said, along with people like Zinn, and Chomsky.

Yeah, Chomsky also said Hezballah was good for Lebanon too, despite the mafia-esque way they run south Lebanon. Not someone I would take moral guidance from.

Another thing is that Chomsky is a linguist and Zinn is a historian. Neither of them is a Cultural Anthropologist or a Evolutionary Psychologist. Iow, what they say about culture you can bet they pulled it out of their ass.

[HomerJay]

No, there's the very simple reason that dead people don't ever kill anyone else. It's not a matter of deterrence, or of undoing the crime. Those are indeed bogus reasons. It's a simple matter of societal self-defense...
To me, it's the equivalent of putting down a rabid dog.
Thank you.
Nobody is operating under the pretense here that putting this thing (I won't call "him" a person) down will act as a deterrent or be adequate vengence. It's taking someone out of circulation that had their chance to contribute to mankind but instead scalded the souls of several children. What is the best way to make sure he doesn't inflict this upon anyone else? End him.

"John, I'm a doctor. I've taken an oath to preserve human life rather than take it. So yes, I'd murder the son of a bitch."
- Herbert Lom in THE DEAD ZONE when asked if he'd assasinate Hitler in the 1930s if he knew in advance what he'd become.

[Erebus]

Wow. I've heard of singers who do crazy things, like lighting there pubes on fire, or getting a dog to lick there balls. But this is by far the wourst I've heard of.

[Clint Barton]

I'm for the death penalty in certain instances, this instance being one.

Give him a fair trial and if he's found guilty, give him a quick execution.

[Jack Zodiac]

I'm for the death penalty in certain instances, this instance being one.

I used to think the same way. For certain crimes, execution is the only answer. However, I've recently reflected upon my stance on the death penalty and came to the conclusion that murder, in any form, is unjustifiable. Execution is the murder of a defenseless man; and even if that was his crime, it's still unjustifiable. Truly atrocious crimes deserve a maximum penalty of life without parole in the highest security of prisons.

Murdering a criminal doesn't undo their deed, and morally shouldn't settle the soul of the offended. It's a gruesomely Biblical idea that contradicts more humanitarian Biblical ideals.

[Clint Barton]

I understand your position. I've had the same issues with abortion.

[Jack Zodiac]

I understand your position. I've had the same issues with abortion.

Ah, that's right. Aren't you a Christian? You guys, more than anybody, should appreciate the logical paradox.

[Noah Johnson]

There's also the fact that the death penalty must, more or less by definition, operate on the assumption that the justice system is completely infallible. Otherwise there would be no possible justification for killing people, since you would know that you are killing an indeterminate number of innocent people, and unlike other forms of punishment, the death penalty offers no possibility of redressing such horrible miscarriages of justice. Ergo, the death penalty, by its very nature, requires an infallible justice system.

Since we know for a fact that the justice system is not infallible... well, the rest of the logic takes care of itself.

[Clint Barton]

Ah, that's right. Aren't you a Christian? You guys, more than anybody, should appreciate the logical paradox.

Yes. I am a Christian and I wrestle with the paradox quite frequently.

[Jack Zodiac]

Since we know for a fact that the justice system is not infallible... well, the rest of the logic takes care of itself.

Yeah. I saw a great episode of "Penn & Teller's: Bullshit" that brought up this very point in an interview with a man who was released from death row years after he was arrested for a crime he didn't commit. On any one of those days, he could've been killed as an innocent man.

[JeffreyWKramer]

There's also the fact that the death penalty must, more or less by definition, operate on the assumption that the justice system is completely infallible. Otherwise there would be no possible justification for killing people, since you would know that you are killing an indeterminate number of innocent people, and unlike other forms of punishment, the death penalty offers no possibility of redressing such horrible miscarriages of justice. Ergo, the death penalty, by its very nature, requires an infallible justice system.

Since we know for a fact that the justice system is not infallible... well, the rest of the logic takes care of itself.

Nonsense. By your logic, nobody should be jailed, either, since we can't be certain of their guilt. You can't really redress mistakenly taking away a person's liberty for any significant length of time, as you can't give back time any more than you can raise the dead.

I do believe the standard of proof should be set higher in capital cases, though. The severity of punishment demands a high burden of proof.

[Jack Zodiac]

Nonsense. By your logic, nobody should be jailed, either, since we can't be certain of their guilt. You can't really redress mistakenly taking away a person's liberty for any significant length of time, as you can't give back time any more than you can raise the dead.

So, you're cool with murdering a couple innocent people here and there to make sure real criminals are murdered as well? Robbing somebody of their freedom for a crime they didn't commit is one thing, but taking their life is something else entirely.

[Mike Smash!]

Nonsense. By your logic, nobody should be jailed, either, since we can't be certain of their guilt. You can't really redress mistakenly taking away a person's liberty for any significant length of time, as you can't give back time any more than you can raise the dead.

That's not what he's saying at all. You can't give someone their time back, but you can make reparations to them. You can release them.

You can't do that for a dead man. You can't do anything for a dead man.

I do believe the standard of proof should be set higher in capital cases, though. The severity of punishment demands a high burden of proof.

And it's in the severest of cases that we have the most horrific crimes where people are much harder pressed to be unemotional and unprejudiced.

[Noah Johnson]

Nonsense. By your logic, nobody should be jailed, either, since we can't be certain of their guilt. You can't really redress mistakenly taking away a person's liberty for any significant length of time, as you can't give back time any more than you can raise the dead.
No, but giving the person back the remainder of their life along with what I assume would be a HEFTY settlement from the government that unjustly convicted him goes a long way.

When you've legally murdered an innocent man, about all you can do is throw up your hands and say "Oops, we won't do it again." I don't consider that acceptable.

I also don't see the point in society "defending itself", in your phrase, from a person locked in a cell who'll never threaten anyone again. That guy is no longer scary.

[Clint Barton]

"Much energy is wasted defending the guilty, yet little is wasted defending the innocent."

I'm not sure who said that, but I believe it nowadays.

[JeffreyWKramer]

I also don't see the point in society "defending itself", in your phrase, from a person locked in a cell who'll never threaten anyone again. That guy is no longer scary.

Except, like I've already noted, people do escape. And not just from minimum-security places, either.

[Mike Smash!]

"Much energy is wasted defending the guilty, yet little is wasted defending the innocent."

I'm not sure who said that, but I believe it nowadays.But the rights we afford even the guilty bleed out to all of us, Clint.

As H. L. Mencken said, they always begin unjust laws with the scoundrels, the people that no one will defend.

Everyone, even human filth, deserves basic rights. And who is to determine who the guilty and innocent are? Not all those that are innocent are sympathetic and many times the guilty are.

That's why with our flawed system and our flawed populace, we can't mete out punishment that's irrevocable, despite the moral implications of killing someone who is no longer a threat to other people.

[JeffreyWKramer]

No, but giving the person back the remainder of their life along with what I assume would be a HEFTY settlement from the government that unjustly convicted him goes a long way.

Oh, and in reality, the settlements in these cases - unless it can be proven that the state fixed the evidence or something like that - are generally minimal to nothing. The person goes free, and that's it. No compensation.

[Mike Smash!]

Except, like I've already noted, people do escape. And not just from minimum-security places, either.How many people has Charles Manson killed since he was imprisoned? Or Gary Ridgway, the Green River Killer? Or how many did Dahmer kill after being incarcerated.

These prison breaks are not common at all.

[JeffreyWKramer]

So, you're cool with murdering a couple innocent people here and there to make sure real criminals are murdered as well? Robbing somebody of their freedom for a crime they didn't commit is one thing, but taking their life is something else entirely.

I'm not cool with it, but I'm better with it than anything resembling the status quo.

Most cases of people wrongly on death row are cleared by DNA evidence. Which is why DNA evidence - and indeed, the most cutting-edge technology available - should always be available to the defense in a capital case.

[Clint Barton]

But the rights we afford even the guilty bleed out to all of us, Clint.

As H. L. Mencken said, they always begin unjust laws with the scoundrels, the people that no one will defend.

Everyone, even human filth, deserves basic rights. And who is to determine who the guilty and innocent are? Not all those that are innocent are sympathetic and many times the guilty are.

That's why with our flawed system and our flawed populace, we can't mete out punishment that's irrevocable, despite the moral implications of killing someone who is no longer a threat to other people.

Mencken, eh? I knew I had something in common with the godless one! ;)

He also said "Every normal man must be tempted at time to hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." In this case, I hoist the black flag.

[Mike Smash!]

Oh, and in reality, the settlements in these cases - unless it can be proven that the state fixed the evidence or something like that - are generally minimal to nothing. The person goes free, and that's it. No compensation.

Which is a helluva lot better than the chair or spending the rest of life in prison. I'm sorry but I don't trust the government or law enforcement enough to give them the power to kill in anything other than self defense against an eminently dangerous person.

[phoenixrising]

Here, I read the new thread title and thought "You'll have to be more specific....most heavy metal frontmen should be severely punished."

[JeffreyWKramer]

How many people has Charles Manson killed since he was imprisoned? Or Gary Ridgway, the Green River Killer? Or how many did Dahmer kill after being incarcerated.

These prison breaks are not common at all.

Neither is wrongful execution of people like that. Most people convicted of the most heinous crimes really are guilty of the crimes. Bundy, Dahmer, Manson, Gacy, etc. were guilty, without question.

[Jack Zodiac]

The person goes free, and that's it.

It's a sad state of affairs when someone can say, "You're free, but that's it." I'd take being "just free" over wrongfully imprisoned or dead.

[Mike Smash!]

Mencken, eh? I knew I had something in common with the godless one! ;)

He also said "Every normal man must be tempted at time to hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." In this case, I hoist the black flag.

I occasionally have to urge to punch people in the face. I choose to restrain myself. I hold myself to a higher standard than that.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Which is a helluva lot better than the chair or spending the rest of life in prison. I'm sorry but I don't trust the government or law enforcement enough to give them the power to kill in anything other than self defense against an eminently dangerous person.

I don't trust the government or law enforcement, either. Which is why I think capital cases should always be tried by jury (which is the case in most, perhaps all, jurisdictions) and that the death sentence should also always be imposed by jury, rather than judge. Not a perfect failsafe, to be sure, but better than leaving justice entirely to the system.

[Clint Barton]

Which is a helluva lot better than the chair or spending the rest of life in prison. I'm sorry but I don't trust the government or law enforcement enough to give them the power to kill in anything other than self defense against an eminently dangerous person.

You'd likely feel different if the child (in this case) were yours. Just sayin'.

[Mike Smash!]

Neither is wrongful execution of people like that. Most people convicted of the most heinous crimes really are guilty of the crimes. Bundy, Dahmer, Manson, Gacy, etc. were guilty, without question.

And who is brought back by killing them? What crimes of their's are undone? Surely they were guilty, but we demean ourselves more than we punish them by putting them to death. They are no longer a threat to anyone.

[Clint Barton]

I occasionally have to urge to punch people in the face. I choose to restrain myself. I hold myself to a higher standard than that.

That's your God given conscience, there Mike! You're going to convert yet. ;)

[Mike Smash!]

You'd likely feel different if the child (in this case) were yours. Just sayin'.

I was one of those children, Clint.

And even if I did want to kill the bastard with my bare hands, it wouldn't give me the right to.

[Jack Zodiac]

You'd likely feel different if the child (in this case) were yours. Just sayin'.

That's another thing. I'm sure I would. That's how these things usually go. However, basic human freedoms shouldn't be adjusted due to emotion. Especially when it's something as huge as killing another human being.

[JeffreyWKramer]

And who is brought back by killing them? What crimes of their's are undone? Surely they were guilty, but we demean ourselves more than we punish them by putting them to death. They are no longer a threat to anyone.

No, they are always a threat as long as they live.

Bundy escaped from incarceration during trial to go on and kill again. Lesser-known violent offenders have escaped incarceration and gone on sprees of rape and murder. Lifers are particularly likely to do that, figuring they have little or nothing to lose.

The world is a better place without Gacy and Bundy.

[Mike Smash!]

That's your God given conscience, there Mike! You're going to convert yet. ;)

Religion is but one path to a sense of morality. Not the only one. Mine comes through a sense of empathy for my fellow man and a willingness to put myself in other peoples' shoes.

[Jack Zodiac]

The world is a better place without Gacy and Bundy.

No one's saying it isn't. The world is a better place without a lot of people who are behind bars right now. Not dead.

[Noah Johnson]

Religion is but one path to a sense of morality. Not the only one. Mine comes through a sense of empathy for my fellow man and a willingness to put myself in other peoples' shoes.
...commie bastard.

[JeffreyWKramer]

No one's saying it isn't. The world is a better place without a lot of people who are behind bars right now. Not dead.
And it would be better yet - and a bit safer - if some of those people behind bars were dead.

[Jack Zodiac]

And it would be better yet - and a bit safer - if some of those people behind bars were dead.

I disagree with your view of a better world if murder is the price. There are far too many negatives to the death penalty to allow death to define our state of living.

[JeffreyWKramer]

I disagree with your view of a better world if murder is the price. There are far too many negatives to the death penalty to allow death to define our state of living.

Who's talking about defining our state of living here?

As to disagreeing, that's fine. That's your right. Just as I have the right to my opinion. It's one I've arrived at by thinking about these issues for decades, knowing the clinical and criminology literature about violent and sex offenders, and working a lot with survivors and sometimes with offenders.

[Spike-X]

You'd likely feel different if the child (in this case) were yours. Just sayin'.

I know I would. Does that mean a civilised society is obligated to act on those feelings?

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Lets see....Dahmer was sent to prison for life after his murders and cannibal acts. He was killed in prison ....so he suffered his fate.

Gary Ridgeway knew he was gonna get the death penatly. His lawyer knew it so he cried like a baby to the DA , showing all the victims he had done to spare his existance. They didn't want to as we saw in the A & E special. Some felt and as one cop said " If the Death Penatly was created , it was created for Gary Ridgeway. But he's a coward and wanted to not face that. "

Bundy....dead. Even though he did offer notes on Ridgeway.

Gacy tried to plead insanity after he told the cops all of his deeds. But the fear that he would get out in a reasonable circumstance from a mental ward had em scared shitless. He had em scared to death that he'd get out in 10 to 20 years and go on another killing spree. So he was put away to death. Because the fear of what he'd do.

[Iangould]

At this point, the guy is an alleged child rapist.

Yes, I know he's suppsoedly confessed.

Anyone want a rundown on the innumerable coerced/fake confessions over the years?

[SUPERECWFAN1]

At this point, the guy is an alleged child rapist.

Yes, I know he's suppsoedly confessed.

Anyone want a rundown on the innumerable coerced/fake confessions over the years?


They've found pictures according to the link. And may have more evidence he's done it to more children.

[Iangould]

They've found pictures according to the link. And may have more evidence he's done it to more children.

Ever read the Judge's summation in the Guildford Four case?

[Ontir]

I've not heard anything that Chomsky has said about Hezbollah, so I can't arue that one way or the other, but both he and Zinn have spoken quite a bit about human rights, and are both, like Ghandi well-respected for their stance, support, and work on behalf of human rights.

As to putting a rabid dog down. What I find so odd about this, is that it's often an arugment used by people who fanatically assert that comparisons to humans as animals are unacceptable arguments. Further, once you've properly incarcerated an offender, there's no reason to excorcise sadism further upon them.

I don't have any kids. If I did, and something like that happened, I know I'd be enraged. I was when something similar happened to my cousin, but I wasn't looking for her attacker to be executed. I wanted him incarcerated for as long as possible - that's for certain, but killing him wouldn't do any good. As it ended up, he died on his own, rather miserably anyway, but his living or dying did nothing in anyway to affect her HIV status. The only thing that would alter that, was a time-machine!

[Adam Crocker]

Another thing is that Chomsky is a linguist and Zinn is a historian. Neither of them is a Cultural Anthropologist or a Evolutionary Psychologist. Iow, what they say about culture you can bet they pulled it out of their ass.

In which case you have a very poor understanding of the discipline of history. I've just finished a thesis on the Zapatistas in which analyzing culture plays a big part in discussing the subject matter. I did not pull that out of my ass. I based it on my reading of primary sources -- namely Zapatista communiques -- in order to discern their values and what ideas they base their identity on. I also compared this to statements that Zapatista settlers have made in the press. Throughout my various history courses I have had to read works by ethnographers, anthropologists, etc. in order to get a better understanding of how to look at history, which includes not only events and people, but things like culture as well. Moreover, historians throughout ages have...surprise, surprise...actually analysed and examined culture too. Being a historian does not involve merely cataloguing historical facts, it analysing those facts and using one's brain to draw conclusions about them and that can include ideas about culture.

So, no I don't see how Zinn necessarily pulled his ideas about culture out of his ass simply because he's a historian. Does that make him right? Of course not, but being a historian doesn't make him any more wrong either. I also don't see how such a criteria should apply to Chomsky either simply for being a linguist, anymore than Chuchill's historical works should be disregarded because he wasn't a trained historian, but an English student who did a short stint in the army.

[The Dog]

I think we should turn to the Bible to see what behavior is "appropriate" for this situation.

Ah yes, here it is. We should throw stones at him until he is dead.

Well, that settles that. His fate should be "Bludgeoned to Death by a barrage of Large Rocks!"

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Ever read the Judge's summation in the Guildford Four case?


Well besides the article and link...thier claiming the pictures and all is enough to arrest him. Thier also saying there could be more victims ahead. So unless its all a coverup , and who knows what happens...it could be the wrong guy ; he'll get his time in front of the Jury. Its just that if and when he gets convicted and sent away....how many will shed a tear for what he's done ?

[Solaris]

The point is, that everyone deserves to be treated properly. No matter how heinous their offense, they're still sentient human beings. Also, how we treat others reflects who we are, ourselves.

I understand your viewpoint. In most ways I share it. But when you have someone who is a habitual offender of the most heinous crimes, or someone who is a psychopathic killer... they aren't going to "get better," and sometimes the system screws up and lets them out. There's plenty of cases of rapist murderers who were released, who did the same thing to more people---people who would've been alive, had they been kept in jail.

So long as we have a system that allows such people back out into society, we need the death penalty. Not as a punishment, nor as a deterrent, for such crimes. Rather, purely and simply, you don't find a dog rabid and then release it---you kill it, humanely and quickly. It's sick, it won't get better---but it *can* harm a lot of other people and animals, if you don't kill it.

There are some people who left their humanity behind a long time ago. To me, the ones who commit these kinds of repeat crimes, who commit torture crimes, etc.---the Daumlers, the Mansons, etc.---should be killed. Oh, the really "high profile" ones like the two I mentioned are almost *never* released. Thing is, of the hundreds more *like* them in everything except press coverage, a signficant number *do* get released... and go do it again, and more innocent people die to satisfy this person's sick, sadistic urges.

[Iangould]

Well besides the article and link...thier claiming the pictures and all is enough to arrest him. Thier also saying there could be more victims ahead. So unless its all a coverup , and who knows what happens...it could be the wrong guy ; he'll get his time in front of the Jury. Its just that if and when he gets convicted and sent away....how many will shed a tear for what he's done ?

My point is that until he's convicted it's a bit early to talk about executing him.

There was a case in the US of a forensic expert faking hundreds of DNA results and other tests - her motivation apparently was to ensure that people who she "knew" were guilty didn't walk. Too bad some of them later turned out to be innocent.

[Jack Zodiac]

So long as we have a system that allows such people back out into society, we need the death penalty.

And everyone's first instinct is to just accept the death penalty, not adjust the way the system works to ensure people who deserve to be locked away forever are locked away forever.

[Iangould]

Wrong thread

[SUPERECWFAN1]

My point is that until he's convicted it's a bit early to talk about executing him.

There was a case in the US of a forensic expert faking hundreds of DNA results and other tests - her motivation apparently was to ensure that people who she "knew" were guilty didn't walk. Too bad some of them later turned out to be innocent.


I heard the case and again I'm not argueing we should kill him even if we could under molestation laws ect ect. I think the pedophile convictions ect ect are the same USA aren't they ? The only thing I'm saying is that prison is tough on pedophiles and he's going in , with people hearing about his acts. Thats where it'll get rough on him.

[Solaris]

I've not heard anything that Chomsky has said about Hezbollah, so I can't arue that one way or the other, but both he and Zinn have spoken quite a bit about human rights, and are both, like Ghandi well-respected for their stance, support, and work on behalf of human rights.

As to putting a rabid dog down. What I find so odd about this, is that it's often an arugment used by people who fanatically assert that comparisons to humans as animals are unacceptable arguments. Further, once you've properly incarcerated an offender, there's no reason to excorcise sadism further upon them.

I don't advocate sadism on them. It does nothing to "teach" them anything, and simply lowers you closer to their level.

I advocate killing the worst criminals---the serial murderers/rapists/molestors---in a quick fashion, not to "pay them back," but purely and simply because they are a danger.

I don't have any kids. If I did, and something like that happened, I know I'd be enraged. I was when something similar happened to my cousin, but I wasn't looking for her attacker to be executed. I wanted him incarcerated for as long as possible - that's for certain, but killing him wouldn't do any good. As it ended up, he died on his own, rather miserably anyway, but his living or dying did nothing in anyway to affect her HIV status. The only thing that would alter that, was a time-machine!

[bold is mine]

As long as possible? What defines "possible," in our world and our system?

A lot of variables, including things like "judges, juries, parole boards, strange state laws passed, legal juggling/plea bargaining, mental health persons who assign more "cure" to the person than there really is, etc... even things like "state budgets.""

So, if we can't COUNT on such an offender being kept behind bars for life, to protect society... and such offenders *are* being released and harming further people... it doesn't make sense. If someone has gone through the very lengthy appeal process, and the evidence etc. still shows them guilty of a crime like this, then kill them, with a quick method.

And no, his living or dying didn't affect *her* status (poor child)... but his dying *did* affect the life status of other potential future victims, should he have lived and been released to do it again.

[Solaris]

And everyone's first instinct is to just accept the death penalty, not adjust the way the system works to ensure people who deserve to be locked away forever are locked away forever.


When someone actually impliments such a system, I'll gladly give up the death penalty.

[Jack Zodiac]

When someone actually impliments such a system, I'll gladly give up the death penalty.

No one's going to. Keeping the death penalty around is easier for our lazy government. So what if a few dozen innocent people may have been killed over the years?

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Well to be honest Charles Manson was convicted of the death penatly in the late 60's. So yeah he should have been put to death but California changed thier laws ect ect , and his sentence became life in prison.

[Solaris]

My point is that until he's convicted it's a bit early to talk about executing him.

There was a case in the US of a forensic expert faking hundreds of DNA results and other tests - her motivation apparently was to ensure that people who she "knew" were guilty didn't walk. Too bad some of them later turned out to be innocent.


Quite true. And I wasn't speaking of this guy, but of such offenders in general. I keep thinking about the people who kidnap kids, torture and rape them, and then kill them. Or who do such to adults, for that matter. I remember someone posted a thread, within the last year or so, about a guy doing this to a little girl, and I guess the cops finding his sick video footage of all he'd done to her. Once I got wind of what the thread was about, I simply could NOT read it... what I'd already heard about it was too much for me. Anyone who does things like that should be gotten rid of, so they can't do it again. Protect the *other* little boys and girls, from meeting the same fate that that poor child did.

[Solaris]

Well to be honest Charles Manson was convicted of the death penatly in the late 60's. So yeah he should have been put to death but California changed thier laws ect ect , and his sentence became life in prison.


Yep... but he still gets the regular parole hearings, like clockwork... and so far as I know, the familes have to attend them every time, to help make sure some stupid asswipe doesn't let this guy out.

Can you imagine, if it had been your sister, daughter, or wife that he'd killed, KNOWING that every six-seven years, you've got to face him again, over and over? Listen to his ranting? All to make absolutely SURE that the system doesn't screw up and let him out?

And think about those who go to such hearings, for similar but less famous criminals... when the state actually DOES let them go free?

[SUPERECWFAN1]

No one's going to. Keeping the death penalty around is easier for our lazy government. So what if a few dozen innocent people may have been killed over the years?


I'm trying to think of the name of the case. It was in Virginia and this man seemingly raped and killed a woman. Well he was on Death Row and he was found guilty. His appeals ran slowly out and he kept saying he was innocent. So people came to his case. They started proclaiming he was innocent and should be let free.

They kept saying he should get delay on his exacution ect ect. This was a few years before really good DNA testing to see if he actually did do the crime. Well , Virginia put him to death. People cried they exacuted an innocent man....claiming the state was wrong !

Years later they did do DNA testing as supporters had raised money to prove how wrong Virginia was. The results came back...and the very guy proclaiming his innocense for years was found to be the one responsible for the rape/murder. I wonder how the followers felt knowing he had did the crime and Virginia was right to put him to death ?


Its the only system we have folks. It has its flaws and no system is perfect. You build a better Justice System to replace the one we have and we'll talk.

[Iangould]

See, I have no problem with declaring people insane and institutionalising them for life becauce they're too dangerous to be released.

Before anyone suggests this is letting them off easy, conditions in many mental hospitals are worse than most prisons.

[Brian Cronin]

Fair enough, DS.

Anyone who wants to start up a new thread on the topic can do so.

-Brian