Life sentence for Ohio mom who microwaved baby

[Flawed]

I don't understand this fascination with an eye for an eye mentality, nor the glorification of death, murder (bin laden), and war. It's this kind of thinking that creates a fractured, barbaric, and unsympathetic society. Very few people really question the reason why some commit violent or other abhorrent acts. They seek only retribution, and so the root of the problems will never be solved. But I suppose it's easier to just lock someone up or kill them than it is to analyse where society failed, and what needs to change.

[TCA]

was the woman sympathetic when she killed her child? probably not

[XerXis]

I don't understand this fascination with an eye for an eye mentality, nor the glorification of death, murder (bin laden), and war. It's this kind of thinking that creates a fractured, barbaric, and unsympathetic society. Very few people really question the reason why some commit violent or other abhorrent acts. They seek only retribution, and so the root of the problems will never be solved. But I suppose it's easier to just lock someone up or kill them than it is to analyse where society failed, and what needs to change.

and that is an overreaction to the left side of the spectrum. While I do agree with you that the responses here are stupid saying that this is somehow societies fault is (without knowing the entire story) probably just as stupid to say. Sick minds and evil people have always existed and will always exist, regardless of society.

[Flawed]

was the woman sympathetic when she killed her child? probably not

And by torturing (yes, prison is a form of torture) and/or killing her, are we not propagating a never ending cycle of suffering? Are we not sending the message that the most severe forms of punishment are acceptable? Violence begets more violence. Punishment begets more punishment. It's never ending, and it solves nothing. The causal roots of the problems still exist, and will never go away until we face them.

I'm not condoning what she did, but by the same token, I also don't agree with imprisonment and/or the death penalty as a solution to anything except as a way to hide the ills of society. It's no coincidence that countries with the greatest inequality and social stratification in turn have the greater number of prisoners and murders. We are all a reflection of the society in which we live. Therefore, these sorts of acts which you abhor, are the fault of all of us as a collective. You can argue about personal responsibility as much as you want, but we are all a product of our environment. Humans aren't born violent, for that trait is the result of nurture, not genetics.

[Dick Montage]

While I do agree that carving her up is no better than her - and surely we should try to raise the accepted level, not lower it...

yes, prison is a form of torture

Hmmm, that's way too leftist for me to jump on!

[XerXis]

And by torturing (yes, prison is a form of torture) and/or killing her, are we not propagating a never ending cycle of suffering? Are we not sending the message that the most severe forms of punishment are acceptable? Violence begets more violence. Punishment begets more punishment. It's never ending, and it solves nothing. The causal roots of the problems still exist, and will never go away until we face them.

I'm not condoning what she did, but by the same token, I also don't agree with imprisonment and/or the death penalty as a solution to anything except as a way to hide the ills of society. It's no coincidence that countries with the greatest inequality and social stratification in turn have the greater number of prisoners and murders. We are all a reflection of the society in which we live. Therefore, these sorts of acts which you abhor, are the fault of all of us as a collective. You can argue about personal responsibility as much as you want, but we are all a product of our environment. Humans aren't born violent, for that trait is the result of nurture, not genetics.

erm, yes it is. While the way you are raised plays a big part on how you will react to situations there is always a part that is genetic. Lot of mental ilnesses that can lead to violence are without a doubt genetic.

[Flawed]

Sick minds and evil people have always existed and will always exist, regardless of society.

I don't agree with this. Poverty, inequality, and social injustice are the source of the majority of what you would term "evil" people. Are children evil? Or does society make them that way? I favour the latter option. When over 80% of all so called "crimes" are financially motivated, one has to wonder what sort of world we could make without it. Many native tribes for instance have no "crime", because they are all equal.

[Flawed]

erm, yes it is. While the way you are raised plays a big part on how you will react to situations there is always a part that is genetic. Lot of mental ilnesses that can lead to violence are without a doubt genetic.

If that's the case, then why aren't some people born with mental illnesses (schizophrenia)? The truth is, they aren't. We all have the potential for mental illness, violence, and abhorrent acts given the right conditions and stresses. It merely requires the right environmental trigger.

[Unix2]

I don't agree with this. Poverty, inequality, and social injustice are the source of the majority of what you would term "evil" people. Are children evil? Or does society make them that way? I favour the latter option. When over 80% of all so called "crimes" are financially motivated, one has to wonder what sort of world we could make without it. Many native tribes for instance have no "crime", because they are all equal.

I quite agree with your very logical thoughts. I believe that people does not born evil, it is from their childhood that everything is created and shaped to what they will became in the future. Family play the most important role in here. You can be poor but have good parents that try their best to give you a decent life. There are many sources that can affect a child behavior.

[The Rev]

*sigh* And to think my tax money is used to house these animals instead of kill them off. I'm not big on capital punishment, but this seems like a given.

You know, I'd tend to agree with you, but in the US today, it still costs more to kill someone than it does to house them in prison for the rest of their lives.... With all the available appeals dragging sentences of those on for years and years, not to mention costing the courts millions upon millions of dollars, the argument that your tax money goes to waste housing people that "should have gotten the death penalty" holds no water.

I don't necessarily disagree with you when it comes to people like this.... HOWEVER, it would take a drastic change in the justice system and appeals process for this argument to hold water. Until then, it will still be cheaper to just let people like her rot in prison. Then again, i dont necessarily dislike the notion that, for the rest of this woman's life, be it a few years or a few decades, she will wake up remembering the horror of what she did, she will live out her miserable day remembering the horror of what she did, she will go to bed remembering the horror of what she did, and she will have NIGHTMARES about her terrible act. The death penalty, to me, seems to be an "easy out" in comparison with living your life with the horror of your past a being a constant reminder of the monster you are.

If I were her, I'd beg for the death penalty, but in no way, shape or form would i DESERVE the death penalty.

[Green_Eye]

Why do people react like this? It's neither a solution nor did she wrong you in any way...

Because there are still people out there who have a differing opinion on what justice is. I for one would have no problem putting her through intense ammounts of pain, she did put a baby in a microwave. She didn't wrong me? oh well that makes it all OK then! jheez what was I thinking?

if you really are able to do that (which i doubt) you are just as sick

Do not doubt it for a second, to anyone who would put a completely and innocent defenceless baby in a microwave, I promise you death would be mercy if I had ANYTHING to do with the situation. If that makes me sick (in your opinion) I will wear that name with pride thank you very much (Y)

[WelshBluebird]

I do not support the death penalty, in fact I am 100% against it, however I do not understand why she wasn't given it in a state that still allows it. Are the courts trying to reduce the number of death sentences given or something?

[Unix2]

I do not support the death penalty, in fact I am 100% against it, however I do not understand why she wasn't given it in a state that still allows it. Are the courts trying to reduce the number of death sentences given or something?

Perhaps is because is more expensive and states are in a limited budget now.

[Descartes]

some people... :/

[thechronic]

Stop using the money argument. Death penaltys cost more then life.

It would cost nothing to stick her somewhere unpleasant and starve her to death.

[Unix2]

It would cost nothing to stick her somewhere unpleasant and starve her to death.

Don't worry that karma is a bitch. She will be beat to death by other inmates in jail so that will be free death penalty.

[RichardK]

Someone else did it....... How the hell do these defense attorneys sleep at night defending these people?

"Defense attorney Kevin Lennen said that death or life in prison would be a tough penalty, but death should go only to the worst offenders. He pointed to evidence that Arnold was drunk at the time of the baby's death. "

She cooked her baby to death. Drunk or not, she is up there on the list of worst offenders.

It would cost nothing to stick her somewhere unpleasant and starve her to death.

death by hanging, or by firing squad is cheap also.

[Green_Eye]

"Defense attorney Kevin Lennen said that death or life in prison would be a tough penalty, but death should go only to the worst offenders. He pointed to evidence that Arnold was drunk at the time of the baby's death. "

She cooked her baby to death. Drunk or not, she is up there on the list of worst offenders.

death by hanging, or by firing squad is cheap also.

I don't understand how being drunk is in anyway a defence if anything that should be used as evidence of negligence on top of murder.

[OuchOfDeath]

Why are there so many people going "DEATH PENALTY DEATH PENALTY" in this thread. What good does it do for you? Your life does not change in any way. The only thing displayed by the death penalty is our inhumanity.

The death penalty does not deter crime. It in fact actually causes higher levels of crime. It shows the nation has no concept of the sanctity of life, and that it has the power to take it away from others. It's murder by the nation (state in this case). It reduces human value and causes a wide range of mentality issues where it shows the people that murder is an appropriate solution to a problem. Murder is never ever a solution to a problem. It's a sick vengeful mentality that has no place in the civilized world where human rights are supposedly held as the ethical foundation of society. It's just another marker of the United States being behind the rest of the Western world.

[DocM]

Why are there so many people going "DEATH PENALTY DEATH PENALTY" in this thread. What good does it do for you?

It removes any possibility they could harm another person be they another prisoner, guard, medical personnel - whatever - plus it's the ultimate punishment. I also don't want them to enjoy one more second on this Earth than absolutely necessary, even if it's a weekly visit to the library.

Also; say a serial killer takes out 10 people in Michigan, which has no death penalty. The case could be made that while the first victims murder is taken care of and the family gets closure, the other 9 murders are freebies that go un-punished. Issuing a death penalty gives a bit more scalability.

Personally; if there were a way to execute, revive, then repeat the process as many times as there are victims that would be perfect.

[Green_Eye]

It removes any possibility they could harm another person be they another prisoner, guard, medical personnel - whatever - plus it's the ultimate punishment. I also don't want them to enjoy one more second on this Earth than absolutely necessary, even if it's a weekly visit to the library.

Also; say a serial killer takes out 10 people in Michigan, which has no death penalty. The case could be made that while the first victims murder is taken care of and the family gets closure, the other 9 murders are freebies that go un-punished. Issuing a death penalty gives a bit more scalability.

Personally; if there were a way to execute, revive, then repeat the process as many times as there are victims that would be perfect.

(Y)

[WelshBluebird]

It removes any possibility they could harm another person be they another prisoner, guard, medical personnel - whatever - plus it's the ultimate punishment. I also don't want them to enjoy one more second on this Earth than absolutely necessary, even if it's a weekly visit to the library.

Also; say a serial killer takes out 10 people in Michigan, which has no death penalty. The case could be made that while the first victims murder is taken care of and the family gets closure, the other 9 murders are freebies that go un-punished. Issuing a death penalty gives a bit more scalability.

Personally; if there were a way to execute, revive, then repeat the process as many times as there are victims that would be perfect.

And yet there is the risk that innocent people would die because of it.

Granted miscarriages of justice do not happen much with murder cases - but they do happen.

That is why I am against it.

[OuchOfDeath]

It removes any possibility they could harm another person be they another prisoner, guard, medical personnel - whatever - plus it's the ultimate punishment. I also don't want them to enjoy one more second on this Earth than absolutely necessary, even if it's a weekly visit to the library.

Also; say a serial killer takes out 10 people in Michigan, which has no death penalty. The case could be made that while the first victims murder is taken care of and the family gets closure, the other 9 murders are freebies that go un-punished. Issuing a death penalty gives a bit more scalability.

Personally; if there were a way to execute, revive, then repeat the process as many times as there are victims that would be perfect.

I'm sorry but the world does not function perfectly. As I already said, the death penalty does not reduce crime. It raises it. There is no good outcome out of it. It causes more crime, and more death. More innocents are killed as a result of it.

I don't think you understand the fact that imposing the death penalty creates the mentality for the entire population that murder is an acceptable solution to a problem. Guess what happens from that kind of mentality? More murders. There is a direct correlation between excessive punishments such as the death penalty and increased crime, specifically violent crime. The world is not a fairy tale, I'm sorry to say. It simply is not a good solution, and it does not work. It may work for your few isolated cases that you mentioned, such as a serial killer not being able to re-offend (most are not able to re-offend with life sentences anyway), but for the general population it actually causes more problems than it solves. The entire country has this sick and twisted attitude of "An eye for an eye". This is in theory a good deterrent, but in reality it is not.

Take Norway as an example. Do you know what kind of jails they have there? They are like hotels, and are filled with all sorts of leisure centres. The longest punishment is 15 years, even for murders. Do you know why they do this? Do you know why they treat criminals as regular human beings? Because it deters crime. If you rehabilitate a person then they stop committing crimes. In some cases this does not work, but for most cases it does. It is a model. This has a compounding effect on society. Society is not as simple as you claim it to be, unfortunately. The world is not filled with serial killers out to kill you. The vast majority of crimes are quite simple and easily deterred, if the person is given a chance. This whole model of treating criminals as human beings and focusing on rehabilitation ends up reducing crime throughout society as it has a net positive effect on people's mentality.

Now Norway is a small country with a specific culture, however the basic principles of their model do work. Excessive harsh punishments and this "Eye for an Eye" mentality where the criminal must die or suffer for their entire lives may make vengeful and frankly twisted individuals like you happy, but it does not make the country safer. This is the bottom line. You are reinforcing the very behaviour you want to stop.

[DocM]

Pschobabble ^2.

[Green_Eye]

I'm sorry but the world does not function perfectly. As I already said, the death penalty does not reduce crime. It raises it. There is no good outcome out of it. It causes more crime, and more death. More innocents are killed as a result of it.

I don't think you understand the fact that imposing the death penalty creates the mentality for the entire population that murder is an acceptable solution to a problem. Guess what happens from that kind of mentality? More murders. There is a direct correlation between excessive punishments such as the death penalty and increased crime, specifically violent crime. The world is not a fairy tale, I'm sorry to say. It simply is not a good solution, and it does not work. It may work for your few isolated cases that you mentioned, such as a serial killer not being able to re-offend (most are not able to re-offend with life sentences anyway), but for the general population it actually causes more problems than it solves. The entire country has this sick and twisted attitude of "An eye for an eye". This is in theory a good deterrent, but in reality it is not.

Take Norway as an example. Do you know what kind of jails they have there? They are like hotels, and are filled with all sorts of leisure centres. The longest punishment is 15 years, even for murders. Do you know why they do this? Do you know why they treat criminals as regular human beings? Because it deters crime. If you rehabilitate a person then they stop committing crimes. In some cases this does not work, but for most cases it does. It is a model. This has a compounding effect on society. Society is not as simple as you claim it to be, unfortunately. The world is not filled with serial killers out to kill you. The vast majority of crimes are quite simple and easily deterred, if the person is given a chance. This whole model of treating criminals as human beings and focusing on rehabilitation ends up reducing crime throughout society as it has a net positive effect on people's mentality.

Now Norway is a small country with a specific culture, however the basic principles of their model do work. Excessive harsh punishments and this "Eye for an Eye" mentality where the criminal must die or suffer for their entire lives may make vengeful and frankly twisted individuals like you happy, but it does not make the country safer. This is the bottom line. You are reinforcing the very behaviour you want to stop.

Would you be so kind as to link to some sources for the parts in bold (Y)