Boston Marathon bomber Tsarnaev found guilty of all charges

[wakjak]

That's debatable. Mostly because what makes up civilized society is largely what people consider to be civilized. There's no hard definition that civilized means not killing. It's perfectly civilized to kill someone in self defense, why is out not civilized to kill someone we can't fix and we'll only ever cause problems for society or be a drain on tax dollars? I don't like killing people, but I'm not a fan paying for the room and board for the decades it takes for them to die naturally either.

The truth is there is no real right answer. They both suck, but people today are so afraid of reality they want to pretend people don't die. And even when the worst people in the world get killed people are ready to jump to those defense because no matter how bad you are, killing is wrong. Even if you've ruined tens or hundreds of lives.

Should we really be wasting resources on these people? In the US, most inmates get better healthcare than people outside of jail. Not saying it's a wonderful life inside but we put a lot into making sure these people are comfortable and healthy. I don't think that makes sense. They made a choice that landed them where they are. They need to live with those choices just like anyone else should.

If we can kill people in defense of our lives, why is it suddenly wrong to kill people for taking them with intent? For ruining lives?

vigilantism that's why. People think "well if they're just going to prison to be put to death, why not just kill the guy myself and save the tax payers dollars.

If they rot in jail for the rest of their lives it shows that there are consequences for their crimes.

They're not going to care a whole damn lot of they're strapped to a table and peacefully put to sleep and die without any pain.

At least alive they'll still feel real physical and emotional pain.

[Anibal P]

vigilantism that's why. People think "well if they're just going to prison to be put to death, why not just kill the guy myself and save the tax payers dollars.

If they rot in jail for the rest of their lives it shows that there are consequences for their crimes.

They're not going to care a whole damn lot of they're strapped to a table and peacefully put to sleep and die without any pain.

At least alive they'll still feel real physical and emotional pain.

 

 

That's a bad and horrible anti-death penalty argument 

Can't you do any better? 

Might as well argue it's the "humane" or "right" or "nice" thing to do

[HawkMan]

There is no point in arguing with you, it seem you cannot see the logical side of things.

 

Even for me, let's say I get into an accident or else, and that I end up either completely paralyzed or in a vegetative state, I'd rather be euthanized than spend the rest of my days in a bed plugged to machine. I know it's not the same situation, but what I'm trying to convey here is that keeping someone alive just for the sake of it make no sense. I don't see what is uncivilized about doing that.

 

 

So your argument is, a completely irrelevant statement?

 

and that would in any case be your choice, which I wholly support. people who are in intolerable pain and can't be cured, should have the option of ending their life. same if you're conscious but locked to a bed completely paralyzed only capable of communicating with blinking, then yeah, let the poor person end it, but it has to be up to the person.  in any case, it's completely irrelevant to this discussion anyway. 

 

Killing people just because it's easier, cheaper, better, revenge, he's a bad person who will always be bad.... it all boils down to revenge and is not right in any modern civilized society. 

 

Heck even as bad as they are they can actually be useful to society when locked up. and I'm not talking about the american style forced labour "rehab". 

[FrancoisC]

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree then.

 

But do tell me, because I am genuinely interested, how could those people be useful in society?

[dead.cell]

Being stuck in prison for the rest of his life is worse than being dead. 

 

even then, revenge killing just to save money... yeah, good... 

 

Killing Breivik wouldn't make anyones life better, it wouldn't solve any problems and he certainly isn't enjoying prison life, not even in comfy norwegian prisons. 

So then let's be humane and sentence him to death. It's the only right thing to do.

 

Being cruel just to be cruel doesn't make anyone's life better, nor would it solve any problems.

[wakjak]

Being cruel just to be cruel doesn't make anyone's life better, nor would it solve any problems.

 

And the death penalty is just as cruel.

[CUBBYJR2005]

I think what he getting is what he deserves. I know it harsh. But he showed no remorse when the verdict was read, when they said that he be sentenced to death. He showed no emotions, and please don't say he was in shock. If he took a life of a child, then I am sorry but he had a right to choose between right, and wrong. Now if he was remorse and feels guilty, and knew what he did was wrong then yes I wouldn't go for the death sentence I would had gone for life instead. 

[dead.cell]

And the death penalty is just as cruel.

Not according to Hawkman. He just said that a life sentence is worse than death.

 

Of course, if both are "just as cruel", then maybe we should just let him go then. I would very much dislike for anyone to think I might be cruel.

[Anibal P]

And the death penalty is just as cruel.

 

I would like to know how you came to such a ridiculous conclusion. I know I won't get a real answer, but should be fun nonetheless 

[CUBBYJR2005]

Guys it not Cruel he is getting what he deserves. Doesn't anyone realize if someone takes a life, and show no remorse then there life should be taken. He showed no remorse guys, and you guys are defending him.I really don't think the kid understands right from wrong, and would probably most likely do it again if you guys let him go.

[123456789A]

That would make those inflicting the punishment no different than him.  In a civilized world there are due processes to deal with crimes.  It's a good thing that those that are in charge of the judicial processes do not act based on their emotions.

 

And, as I already quoted, in most cases Death Penalty costs more than to imprison the person for life.

 

Do a Kickstarter to cover all those costs and expedite his death penalty. No need to delay.

[Anibal P]

Do a Kickstarter to cover all those costs and expedite his death penalty. No need to delay.

 

Sadly the soonest we can rid ourselves of this scum is 15 years, IF the Feds rush, which I doubt they will, what with appeals and all that other legal stuff lawyers drool about 

[+Raze Subscriber²]

Timothy McVeigh was convicted in 1997 and executed by lethal injection in 2001 after all of his appeals failed (an unusually short period of time).  Maybe Tsarnaev's legal process will not be drawn out either.

[HawkMan]

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree then.

 

But do tell me, because I am genuinely interested, how could those people be useful in society?

 

They can be used as examples, they can e studied, they can talk with people who might end up in their situation after you have a half decent rehab system actually work with them and have them work out their issues, and since most of these types of people change drastically as they get older. 

[Anibal P]

They can be used as examples, they can e studied, they can talk with people who might end up in their situation after you have a half decent rehab system actually work with them and have them work out their issues, and since most of these types of people change drastically as they get older. 

 

 

Not much to study, they follow a religion that encourages the type of actions they commit, as for the rest, keeping them away from society is the best  alternative 

[ctebah]

Not much to study, they follow a religion that encourages the type of actions they commit, as for the rest, keeping them away from society is the best alternative

There is a lot to study when it comes to people like that. Human behaviour is very unpredictable.

As many have already stated, there is a reason why the vast majority of civilized nations have abolished the death penalty.

Haven't you guys learned from history? Killing people solves nothing. Killing terrorists only brought about more terrorists. Incarcerating people solved nothing either. Instead, we should be looking into, and solving, social issues at their roots.

[Anibal P]

There is a lot to study when it comes to people like that. Human behaviour is very unpredictable.

As many have already stated, there is a reason why the vast majority of civilized nations have abolished the death penalty.

Haven't you guys learned from history? Killing people solves nothing. Killing terrorists only brought about more terrorists. Incarcerating people solved nothing either. Instead, we should be looking into, and solving, social issues at their roots.

 

 

Wer'e going ot have to agree to disagree, I frimly believe the death penalty is needed and useful, can't argue with "civilized" people about it 

[HawkMan]

Wer'e going ot have to agree to disagree, I frimly believe the death penalty is needed and useful, can't argue with "civilized" people about it 

 

I hope you don't oppose the sharia justice and punishments in extremist muslim states either then, cause you sound just like them in your "arguments"

[techbeck]

Civilized society.  Funny concept.  No society is civilized or else things like this wouldn't happen.  He was given due process, found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  He was treated fairly and that is where it ends.  He deserves what he is getting.

 

And barbarism?  Seriously?  I think people are tossing that around way to much.  Killing this guy is him getting off easy.  He has a really good chance of being treated way worse in jail.  Of course, the opposite could happen as well.

 

And that is really my opinion on the subject, like it or not, agree with it or not.  I really do not care.

[seta-san]

I hope you don't oppose the sharia justice and punishments in extremist muslim states either then, cause you sound just like them in your "arguments"

there's a huge difference between sharia and this. Sharia demands hands be cut off for just for theft. the death penalty is applied to almost everything after that. this person committed a crime of such magnitude that he has forfeited his right to life. We're not executing him because he took some drugs or left a religion. He killed people, maimed and seriously injured many others, caused a major city to shut down, and caused terror throughout a whole nation. He received every benefit of a fair criminal justice system and the benefit of being tried in one of the most liberal states in the country.  It's just stupid to compare this to sharia

[HawkMan]

there's a huge difference between sharia and this. Sharia demands hands be cut off for just for theft. the death penalty is applied to almost everything after that. this person committed a crime of such magnitude that he has forfeited his right to life. We're not executing him because he took some drugs or left a religion. He killed people, maimed and seriously injured many others, caused a major city to shut down, and caused terror throughout a whole nation. He received every benefit of a fair criminal justice system and the benefit of being tried in one of the most liberal states in the country.  It's just stupid to compare this to sharia

 

I said sharia justice not sharia laws, and even then sharia laws vary depending on state and interpretation. 

[123456789A]

There is a lot to study when it comes to people like that. Human behaviour is very unpredictable.

As many have already stated, there is a reason why the vast majority of civilized nations have abolished the death penalty.

Haven't you guys learned from history? Killing people solves nothing. Killing terrorists only brought about more terrorists. Incarcerating people solved nothing either. Instead, we should be looking into, and solving, social issues at their roots.

 

So if killing terrorists or jailing them solves nothing, what do you suggest we do with this Joker Tsarnaev character? Counsel him and try to integrate him back into society?

[ctebah]

So if killing terrorists or jailing them solves nothing, what do you suggest we do with this Joker Tsarnaev character? Counsel him and try to integrate him back into society?

Obviously killing terrorists doesn't work. And yes, I believe changing his opinion on his views would be a lot easier than changing opinions of those that believe death sentences solve anything.

[123456789A]

Obviously killing terrorists doesn't work. And yes, I believe changing his opinion on his views would be a lot easier than changing opinions of those that believe death sentences solve anything.

 

Too many uncertainties in your approach.

 

What about killing Nazis? Was that effective or should we have sat down with Hitler and tried to talk him into being a nice guy?

[+Random Stranger Subscriber¹]

 

What about killing Nazis? Was that effective or should we have sat down with Hitler and tried to talk him into being a nice guy?

ohh ohh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law