Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Prince · 02-17-2004, 06:56 AM

It's a tough call to make when you actually have to live with the decision. I've always been pro death penalty, and sitting here in front of my computer, this subject matter fades into the background again as I close the tab and switch to the Titty Board. Obviously I cannot say that I would be forced to give the matter as much thought as the jury of that case had to give.

But here is what I believe, for now: people say that putting him to death would not be a punishment, as he would not have to suffer. They say that death is easier. How do we know that? None of us has been on the other side, we don't know what awaits us there. Most likely nothing at all, but regardless, I don't think punishment applies here anyway. I would not judge him to death to punish him. I would judge him to death because that is what he deserves. Kill, and get killed.

A life in prison, as a sentence, guarantees nothing. Laws have and will continue to change, and a life sentence given today may be undone 20 years from now, or 40 years from now. If you want to sentence someone to the equivalent of death, without killing them, sentence them to a Russian prison.

But I don't see how that would serve as justice.

In prison, they get fed, they get clothed, they get to go and have fresh air, they get to read. They get to think. They can acquire education, they can embetter themselves. It may not be living as we think of living, but it is being alive.

Again, I see no justice there.

Any restitution or contribution he could make to the society down the road would be - in my mind - measured against the death of his victim. And there is no such contribution that he could make that could to me justify allowing him to live.

What would Christopher Beens recommend? What would he say we should have done with this Jeremy? He's the one who got shot in the abdomen, chest and face. Those sitting in that jury bench should keep that in mind. Nowhere in that article did they talk about that. Only about how unfortunate Jeremy's childhood was. What about Christopher's childhood? What about his ambitions?

There is little room for that much consideration when the victim is not there to speak for himself, or to pass judgment. But, without taking a stand on whether Christopher would have wanted Jeremy sentenced to death or not - as I don't know any better than the rest of us do - I will say this much:

Should this happen to me, I would want the asshole who did it to fry. Assuming that my opinion - the victim's - would make any difference whatsoever.

02-17-2004, 06:56 AM	#34 (permalink)
Prince /nɑndəsˈkrɪpt/ Location: LV-426	It's a tough call to make when you actually have to live with the decision. I've always been pro death penalty, and sitting here in front of my computer, this subject matter fades into the background again as I close the tab and switch to the Titty Board. Obviously I cannot say that I would be forced to give the matter as much thought as the jury of that case had to give. But here is what I believe, for now: people say that putting him to death would not be a punishment, as he would not have to suffer. They say that death is easier. How do we know that? None of us has been on the other side, we don't know what awaits us there. Most likely nothing at all, but regardless, I don't think punishment applies here anyway. I would not judge him to death to punish him. I would judge him to death because that is what he deserves. Kill, and get killed. A life in prison, as a sentence, guarantees nothing. Laws have and will continue to change, and a life sentence given today may be undone 20 years from now, or 40 years from now. If you want to sentence someone to the equivalent of death, without killing them, sentence them to a Russian prison. But I don't see how that would serve as justice. In prison, they get fed, they get clothed, they get to go and have fresh air, they get to read. They get to think. They can acquire education, they can embetter themselves. It may not be living as we think of living, but it is being alive. Again, I see no justice there. Any restitution or contribution he could make to the society down the road would be - in my mind - measured against the death of his victim. And there is no such contribution that he could make that could to me justify allowing him to live. What would Christopher Beens recommend? What would he say we should have done with this Jeremy? He's the one who got shot in the abdomen, chest and face. Those sitting in that jury bench should keep that in mind. Nowhere in that article did they talk about that. Only about how unfortunate Jeremy's childhood was. What about Christopher's childhood? What about his ambitions? There is little room for that much consideration when the victim is not there to speak for himself, or to pass judgment. But, without taking a stand on whether Christopher would have wanted Jeremy sentenced to death or not - as I don't know any better than the rest of us do - I will say this much: Should this happen to me, I would want the asshole who did it to fry. Assuming that my opinion - the victim's - would make any difference whatsoever. __________________ Who is John Galt?