Death Penalty for shooter?

formidable doer of the nasty wrote:

Here's a death penalty I WOULD support: Take that deranged c*** from Alaska who releases posters with crosshairs on political opponents so that inevitably one of the delusional retards who worship her will take it literally, and string her up in the nearest tree.

I wish I knew who you are and where you're at because I would take great pleasure in slapping you across your ignorant face.

Did Governor Palin have anything to do with these targets?

On the thread about the shooting last night there were other examples given; all from the left. Let me guess, when liberals use gun targets it's freedom of speech right?

You need to shut the f*** up and quit showing your ignorance and the shooter need to be executed.

formidable doer of the nasty wrote:

Here's a death penalty I WOULD support: Take that deranged **** from Alaska who releases posters with crosshairs on political opponents so that inevitably one of the delusional retards who worship her will take it literally, and string her up in the nearest tree.

I thought you guys were against "hate speech"... oh, wait...

I think a lifetime of being raped in prison by bigger men than he can ever imagine would be better. It'll give the kid a new meaning to the word donut.

He murdered a 9 year old girl. He should wake up every day for the next 60+ years and wish he stayed home making youtube videos that day.

The other issue raised here is at what point is it ever appropriate to try and intervene BEFORE a guy does something like this. Leaving the guy's Internet ravings aside, more and more people who knew him in school or wherever are indicating how obviously unstable this guy was. Would it not have been appropriate to give the guy some kind of treatment, even if he resisted it, before this happened?

formidable doer of the nasty wrote:

Here's a death penalty I WOULD support: Take that deranged c*** from Alaska who releases posters with crosshairs on political opponents so that inevitably one of the delusional retards who worship her will take it literally, and string her up in the nearest tree.

1/10. This is a nonissue, democrats do/have done the same thing. This is same argument that violent videogames are behind school shootings- a load of BS, and a lame excuse by people who want to point the finger at someone. Are you honestly for the death penalty for people you don't like? Say hello to Hitler and Stalin for me.

Also, why all the woman hating? And use of the 'R' word? Not very PC. Spread the word to end the word, my friend.

Nothing like some violence against white people to stir the blood lust of the Right Wing.

Killing is their answer to every problem. Just like the crazy SOB who did this shooting

Yanqui wrote:

The other issue raised here is at what point is it ever appropriate to try and intervene BEFORE a guy does something like this. Leaving the guy's Internet ravings aside, more and more people who knew him in school or wherever are indicating how obviously unstable this guy was. Would it not have been appropriate to give the guy some kind of treatment, even if he resisted it, before this happened?

Easy to say that, but think about what people write on here, most the time people just assume you are kidding or being dramatic.

Not sure about his offline rantings, but 1/2 the people in this thread should be dealt an intervention by the way they talk. You cannot "intervene" on someone based on what they say unless they are making direct threats, even then it is hard.

I think that is a good thing, even when awful things like this happen.

We don't want a Neo-McCarthyist government or police state.

Well, I wasn't thinking about online rantings as much as actual "in person" behavior. Based on numerous reports, the guy was clearly sick. Not sure if that equates to "homicidal," but he was sick.

It's not cheaper to give him life in prison. It cost 20 cents for a bullet. Shoot him in the head and he won't feel a thing.

Cost problem solved

drunk runner. wrote:

He clearly is guilty. Execute him now with a gunshot to the head.

That's probably what he thought about the people he shot.

IF it was him who shot them.

We don't know that at this point, and possibly never will.

Chic Harley... wrote:

I would like to know what death penalty opponents have to say about his loon that killed 6 yesterday. From what I understand he's going to be eligible for it, so are you for it?

Did you really just ask if death penalty opponents are for the death penalty?

Ummmmm....

johnny langenwanker wrote:

Why would you say that? What kind of message does that send to our children? "No son, it's okay that Billy Boy stole your lunchbox. You'll be allowed to beat his teeth in with a baseball bat during second period tomorrow." or, "No son, you don't have to learn what forgiveness means. It's not a cornerstone of a rational, civilized society. It doesn't matter that Billy Boy is mentally deranged and didn't know what he was doing, you're still allowed to beat him until your blood-vengeance is satisfied."

A man is defined more by how he treats his enemies, not his friends. You do not fear, you always do the right thing. And here, the right thing is to make sure that someone who is mentally ill never is able to hold a gun.

You seem a sensible fellow. What the heck are you doing here on Letsrun?

So no law enforcement, no punishment, no jails, no accountability. Just forgive everyone for their actions on the basis that everyone is mentally ill. Yes, I'm sure that's the message we want to send.

Life in prison is clearly the way to go. Think of all the times he will be raped. His ass will literally be torn to shreds. Life in prison!

i dont know for sure, but i thought that if a person was found not guilty by reason of insanity he would be placed in a mental hospital for a 6 month evaluation, if he is still found insane they would hold him for another 6 months and this could go on for the rest of his life. BUT if after 6 months he is found to be no longer insane (responding well to treatment) then he could be released and be a free person in society.

just what i have heard, of course if he is released someone who is mad at this incident would likely kill him.

either way his future is over with 1 of 4 likely endings.

1. death penalty

2. life in jail

3. life in a mental hospital

4. release from a mental hospital, which in his case would be a de-facto death penalty.

An execution is not simply death. It is just as different from the privation of life as a concentration camp is from prison. It adds to death a rule, a public premeditation known to the future victim, an organization which is itself a source of moral sufferings more terrible than death. Capital punishment is the most premeditated of murders, to which no criminal's deed, however calculated can be compared. For there to be an equivalency, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months. Such a monster is not encountered in private life

Albert Camus---"Reflections on the Guillotine, Resistance, Rebellion & Death"

Political assasinations are a part of politics. US taxpayers pay 100% of the recurring costs for Israel to assassinate leaders of Hamas, Syria, Iran, etc. So what's wrong when Loughner tries the same thing ? He should be treated as a hero like the US treats it's Nazi-Zionist militants who assassinate Arab leaders.

Gandhi wrote:

"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

That's nice. Now, let's all hug each other and sing Kumbaya while innocent people are being shot.

johnny langenwanker wrote:

Why would you say that? What kind of message does that send to our children? "No son, it's okay that Billy Boy stole your lunchbox. You'll be allowed to beat his teeth in with a baseball bat during second period tomorrow."

Horrible analogy. Stop exxagerating to make your point. It only makes you look stupid.