Right or wrong?

[John Connor]

This is just bugging the crap out of me. Here in Colorado they have the Holmes trial going on. That Aurora theater shooter. I'm seeing on the news that they are trying to establish if he knew right or wrong. Now I can guarantee you John Wayne Gacy was fucking nuts and most likely didn't want to be caught. So did he know right vs wrong? How about Jeffrey Dahmer?

 

[Tim]

Yes.

 

[clamum]

I think Holmes knew what he was doing. He planned that out pretty goddamn well.

 

[purbeast0]

i don't give a shit if he knows right or wrong, that crazy fuck needs to be put away or to death.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

i don't give a shit if he knows right or wrong, that crazy fuck needs to be put away or to death.

That will happen regardless of if he's found sane or not. You don't let criminally insane murderers free just because they don't know right from wrong. You put them in a tiny padded room and look at them through a small pane of glass forever.

 

[pete6032]

LOL!

 

[soulcougher73]

Who cares if he knew right or wrong. He still killed people and needs to pay by death

 

[DesiPower]

Media circus... bugs the crap out of me...

 

[GagHalfrunt]

That whole "didn't know right from wrong" thing is one of the biggest problems with our legal system. That should not be able to be used as a defense, it needs to be re-assigned as a tool for the prosecution instead. If you're truly unable to understand that shooting up a theater full of people is wrong you need to be exterminated for the good of society.

 

[Safeway]

If you listen to his interview with the psychiatrist, it sounds fucking bogus. You can tell that he is saying what his attorney told him to say. It just isn't natural conversation. He has awkwardly says things like "Oh, yea, and all the violent thoughts." "Yea, umm, like saw blades flying through the air and cutting people."

It just screams fake to me.

 

[rudeguy]

I voted for Pitch Perfect 2

 

[brianmanahan]

I voted for Pitch Perfect 2

rudeguy is a raging moron

 

[rudeguy]

rudeguy is a raging moron

this should be a default option on all polls.

That guy is an idiot.

 

[Markbnj]

I don't think it's a simple question. Sociopaths have little empathy for others, and since most of our notions of 'right' and 'wrong' are based on our self-interest, or by extension our empathy for the self-interest of others, they have little reason to agree with us about them. So they don't feel that what they did was wrong. They might even feel it was very right, for a host of insane reasons. The question should really be: did the perpetrator know the rest of us would think it was wrong? Did they know it was against the law?

My answer to that is: I bet they did, but who really cares?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

This is just bugging the crap out of me. Here in Colorado they have the Holmes trial going on. That Aurora theater shooter. I'm seeing on the news that they are trying to establish if he knew right or wrong. Now I can guarantee you John Wayne Gacy was fucking nuts and most likely didn't want to be caught. So did he know right vs wrong? How about Jeffrey Dahmer?

High school civics class stuff.

Showing that he knew right from wrong is probably a legal requirement for whatever he's being charged with. Look up the differences between, say, first, second and third degree, manslaughter, and involuntary manslaughter.

Anyway, it might be easy to prove, but you still have to go through the motions in court. This guys going away for a looong time.

 

[disappoint]

Not guilty by reason of insanity.

How the f__ is an insane person not guilty? If they can't control themselves that's even worse! They'd be more likely to do it again. They should get a harsher sentence not lesser.

Can someone explain why not guilty by reason of insanity makes sense?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Not guilty by reason of insanity.

How the f__ is an insane person not guilty? If they can't control themselves that's even worse! They'd be more likely to do it again. They should get a harsher sentence not lesser.

Can someone explain why not guilty by reason of insanity makes sense?

Cujo was a good dog who always tried to keep his owners happy, but the ravage of rabies drove him to violence.

 

[disappoint]

Cujo was a good dog who always tried to keep his owners happy, but the ravage of rabies drove him to violence.

Cujo would be shot and killed. He may not have been insane before rabies, but after being infected he would be, and he wouldn't just be set free after diagnosis or given a "lighter sentence".

 

[Captante]

i don't give a shit if he knows right or wrong, that crazy fuck needs to be put away or to death.

Agreed. There comes a point where intentions really don't matter much and IMO this is one of them.

 

[Phoenix86]

That will happen regardless of if he's found sane or not. You don't let criminally insane murderers free just because they don't know right from wrong. You put them in a tiny padded room and look at them through a small pane of glass forever.

More often than not an insanity defense won't save you anyways. The weight of the crime seems to also come into play. IE, if the crime is severe enough, you're deemed sane just so you can be punished.

 

[inachu]

He made his own video walking to the theater. they removed it from the web and his thought processes were really screwed up as you could tell from the video.

He was also upset and jealous about family friends.

 

[Phoenix86]

Not guilty by reason of insanity.

How the f__ is an insane person not guilty? If they can't control themselves that's even worse! They'd be more likely to do it again. They should get a harsher sentence not lesser.

Can someone explain why not guilty by reason of insanity makes sense?

If you don't understand what you did was wrong, like at a fundamental level, you won't understand the punishment. It would be cruel and unusual to punish someone for something they thought was OK.

Imagine you don't understand murder, at all. You see other people as meat bags no different than cattle or a worm. So you kill one, because you're hungry, or they had something you wanted.

Now, someone comes along and arrests you and puts you in jail, they say it's punishment for being bad. You're confused and upset. Forever.

Now, replace my "imagine you..." scenario with a completely legal action, like eating breakfast. Imaging you are arrested and put in jail for life, for eating breakfast, or some other inane, legal action.

That's what it would be like to punish someone truly insane.

 

[BUTCH1]

Agreed. There comes a point where intentions really don't matter much and IMO this is one of them.

Tied to a pole and 10 relatives of the deceased get to pick their choice of armament and all fire simultaneously. I want hunks of meat flying off this fucking asshole, I want him reduced to a pile of fleshy fucking rubble. Then he will realize what he did was "wrong"...

 

[Mai72]

James was a guy who was begging for help, yet we turned our back on him. We need to be proactive in regard to mental health. Instead, we are reactive and don't do anything until it's too late.

I'm going to pray for Holmes. Forgiveness is key. If I were one of the victims I would forgive Holmes as well. The blame has to be put on society for not giving James the help he needed.

 

[Humpy]

If you don't understand what you did was wrong, like at a fundamental level, you won't understand the punishment. It would be cruel and unusual to punish someone for something they thought was OK.

Imagine you don't understand murder, at all. You see other people as meat bags no different than cattle or a worm. So you kill one, because you're hungry, or they had something you wanted.

No, someone comes along and arrests you and puts you in jail, they say it's punishment for being bad. You're confused and upset. Forever.

Now, replace my "imagine you..." scenario with a completely legal action, like eating breakfast. Imaging you are arrested and put in jail for life, for eating breakfast, or some other inane, legal action.

That's what it would be like to punish someone truly insane.

It's not logical to conclude that a person incapable of understanding the implications of right/wrong good/bad would be confused and upset by "punishment for being bad". It could just be a new reality with no understanding or emotion felt by the change. It wouldn't necessarily be cruel or unusual to them.