• Sign in to Neowin Faster!

    Create an account on Neowin to contribute and support the site.

Sign in to follow this  

Zacarias Moussaoui verdict to be read at 4:00 pm

Recommended Posts

Joni_78    48

giving a criminal the old hit o' the needle isn't considered to be cruel and unusual punishment - that would be torturing, burning alive, the death chair, etc. i think that when you're born you have a chance to prove yourself and contribute to society. when you take the lives of thousands, you definitely qualify to have your life taken away. how can some of you want to let him live? he has no prupose to serve in this world and his time is up.

Still it's not their fault that they have come to the point where they kill thousands of people. Everyone, you and I can just snap and kill someone for example in extreme anger. Sure we need send to jail for that but not to death, it's just something that happens. Then there is people who kill several people, they are not "normal", something has messed them bad and it's not their fault. For example Hitler did lots of bad things but still it's not his fault, he heard all of his life stories how jews have done this and that and they are no good, so he had developed guite a grudge for them. But to kill millions of jews, something has happened that messed him that bad, normal person wouldn't do that no matter how much they hate. People aren't born bad, society and all the things that happens to you during your life mold the way you are now.

I consider myself a good person, I don't harm animals or humans, but if I would have born in Gaza or something, living around extreme islamistic atmosphere where it would be honour to fly a plane into a building, then there would be good chance I might just do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
h3xis    1

so if you were in a situation where some psychotic guy was coming at you with a knife and you had the choices of A) shooting him with a gun you have in your hand or B) letting him stab you resulting in a high rate of death, which would you choose? it is a matter of defense to keep him from committing future crimes. you can't correct that behavior because he's been taught to think that way. the only way to "cure" him i suppose would to be to remove him from existence where he can not carry out further harm to others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Miuku.    364

so if you were in a situation where some psychotic guy was coming at you with a knife and you had the choices of A) shooting him with a gun you have in your hand or B) letting him stab you resulting in a high rate of death

I'd shoot him in the leg, that way he would live and would answer for his actions by serving time in jail and could possibly be rehabilitated. In the cases of mental disorder, such actions might be prevented with proper medication or social/medical care.

it is a matter of defense to keep him from committing future crimes.

Preventing future crimes won't go away by killing people that commit crimes - it is done by removing the necessity or reason for the person to commit such actions.

you can't correct that behavior because he's been taught to think that way.

There are very few cases of individuals that cannot become useful members of society - maybe they won't be rocket scientists but they can contribute in other ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joni_78    48

so if you were in a situation where some psychotic guy was coming at you with a knife and you had the choices of A) shooting him with a gun you have in your hand or B) letting him stab you resulting in a high rate of death, which would you choose? it is a matter of defense to keep him from committing future crimes. you can't correct that behavior because he's been taught to think that way. the only way to "cure" him i suppose would to be to remove him from existence where he can not carry out further harm to others.

Yes I would probably shoot but not to kill. You are right that in most cases people like this are beyond help, so that they could be ever set free. Somewhere along the way our social/medical help has failed with that person and the solution to fix it cannot be needle. They should be locked into prison without option to ever get free.

Edited by Joni_78

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
h3xis    1

Yes I would probably shoot but not to kill. You are right that in most cases people like this are beyond help, so that they could be ever set free. Somewhere along the way our social/medical help has failed with that person and the solution to fix it cannot be needle. They should be locked into prison without option to ever get free.

i'm not trying to make this come off the wrong way, but imprisoning criminals is expensive and if the government decides to imprison everybody, would this not contribute to the issue of overcrowding? i see your point and i understand what you're saying but i'm looking at this from an economical point of view because that's what society has become all about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John S.    359

I'd rather call it a replacement for the bloodthirsty mob of old times - you murder (yes, executing people is still murder, much like killing people in war is murder) people because the mob wants you to not because it will prevent anything or rectify the issue that made the person do what they did.

It's about accountability for what's already been done. Who cares about preventing anything further? You cannot recitfy a life that's been irrevocably taken. It's about paying the price for your actions. You commit murder and take a life, you surrender your own, period.

Neither killing people in war, or with the death penatly are murder

Main Entry: 1mur?der>

Pronunciation: 'm&r-d&r

Function: noun

1 : the crime ofunlawfully> killing a person especially with malice aforethought

xxdesmus and adonai are wrong imo

why would you kill someone because they have killed?

id rather try to correct that life than kill it off

id like to think we are a community of love and not death

We are. We love the initial victim(s) enough to see that their murderer is heldaccountable for their actions>. To do less, to allow that person to live, to whine over them and attempt tounderstand> what made them do it, would show nothing but how little we care about the initial life that was needlessly wasted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joni_78    48

It's about accountability for what's already been done. Who cares about preventing anything further? You cannot recitfy a life that's been irrevocably taken. It's about paying the price for your actions. You commit murder and take a life, you surrender your own, period.

Neither killing people in war, or with the death penatly are murder

We are. We love the initial victim(s) enough to see that their murderer is held accountable for their actions. To do less, to allow that person to live, to whine over them and attempt to understand what made them do it, would show nothing but how little we care about the initial life that was needlessly wasted.

Ok, you are driven by revenge in this case then. Don't you think they would suffer more in prison for the rest of their lifes? I would love to go to visit in the German prison, there would be old Adolf behind the glass wall like in the zoo. School classes would visit to see him and point fingers at him. If only he wouldn't have killed himself :rolleyes: .If Saddam is executed then it's just a relief to him, still someone thinks they won and got something from it.

Also it seems that definition of murder is different in countries that have death penalty and the ones that doesn't.

Like you said, in English dictionary it is:

"the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought"

in Finnish dictionary

"Intentionally killing another person"

Edited by Joni_78

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John S.    359

Ok, you are driven by revenge in this case then. Don't you think they would suffer more in prison for the rest of their lifes? I would love to go to visit in the German prison, there would be old Adolf behind the glass wall like in the zoo. School classes would visit to see him and point fingers at him. If only he wouldn't have killed himself :rolleyes: .If Saddam is executed then it's just a relief to him, still someone thinks they won and got something from it.

Also it seems that definition of murder is different in countries that have death penalty and the ones that doesn't.

Like you said, in English dictionary it is:

"the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought"

in Finnish dictionary

"Intentionally killing another person"

Revenge? :| No, no, no...accountability for one's actions, taking responsibility for what they've done. Without malice that one would think would be involved in revenge. Again, I'll whip out Websters.

Main Entry: re?spon?si?ble

Pronunciation: ri-'sp?n(t)-s&-b&l

2 a : able to answer for one's conduct and obligations

not to be confused with:

Main Entry: 1re?venge

Pronunciation: ri-'11:: to avenge (as oneself) usually by retaliating in kind or de22:: to inflict injury in return for

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Miuku.    364

Who cares about preventing anything further?

Let's see.. I do for one. I do not tolerate taking the life of anyone, no matter how dispicable their actions have been. Jailing them for life is fine - killing them is not.

Neither killing people in war, or with the death penatly are murder

War is pre-meditated murder on massive scale.

Since you like dictionaries, here's something you seemed to have cut off from your original quote.

Main Entry: 2murder

Function: verb

Inflected Form(s): mur?dered; mur?der?ing /'m&r-d(&-)ri[ng]/

transitive senses

1 : to kill (a human being) unlawfully and with premeditated malic2 : to slaughter wantonly : SLAY/b>

3 a : to put an end to b : TEASE, TORMENT c : MUTILATE, MANGLE <murders French> d : to defeat badly

intransitive senses : to commit murder

synonym see KILL

War, without a doubt, is nothing more than slaughtering of innocents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John S.    359

Let's see.. I do for one. I do not tolerate taking the life of anyone, no matter how dispicable their actions have been. Jailing them for life is fine - killing them is not.

War is pre-meditated murder on massive scale.

Since you like dictionaries, here's something you seemed to have cut off from your original quote.

War, without a doubt, is nothing more than slaughtering of innocents.

As I'm sure you're aware, words oftentimes have several meanings depending on the context in which they're used. I quoted the meaning in context. I omitted the latter entry (below) from Webster as it did not pertain to the topic of executing Moussaoui.

2 a : something very difficult or dangerous <the traffic was murder> b : something outrageous or blameworthy <getting away with murder>

This court decision was simply to see if he was eligible for the death penalty. Now we have another trial on those grounds which will no doubt take weeks.

ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) - Prosecutors are providing a glimpse of what they intend to prove in the next phase of Zacarias Moussaoui's death-penalty trial.

Prosecutors today proposed that the jury rule on 27 pages of questions about the impact of Moussaoui and the 9/11 attacks before deciding whether the al-Qaida conspirator should be executed.

They intend to identify for the jury by name and photograph each of the 2,972 victims and to call witnesses to tell the story of about 45 representative victims.

Testimony on whether Moussaoui deserves execution or life in prison begins Thursday morning and could take several weeks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
strekship    16

Right so n America where u believe in god so strongly! You believe you as people have the right to take a life, but surly that?s your gods job, sorry im not even religious I just believe some people suffer in prison allot more than taking the easy rote and being killed

and my tax money gets to support him while he is there. I think not. Id rather get rid of him than keep him around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.