Scott Peterson to die for his crimes

[sixone]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
I do wonder exactly what is so "heinous" about this crime. Is it because Lacy was so fun loving, so giving, so pretty, so vivacious, so 'full of life'?? Would this story have even made the news if Lacy had been a skanky prostitute or drug addict?

:brokenheart:

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: aidanjm
I do wonder exactly what is so "heinous" about this crime. Is it because Lacy was so fun loving, so giving, so pretty, so vivacious, so 'full of life'?? Would this story have even made the news if Lacy had been a skanky prostitute or drug addict?

To be honest, I don't know how to reply to a person who can't see what is so heinous about a man who murders his pregnant wife. I would think that to any person who respects life, who cherishes its infinite beauty and possibilities, the answer would be obvious.

Jason

So it's all about the baaaaby, is it?

To be honest, I don't know how to reply to a person who claims to "respect life" and "cherish its infinite beauty and possibilities" and yet so obviously lusts for the death of another human being.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
I think it is important for all decent people to remain vocal in their opposition to the death penalty, and to continue articulating the numerous reasons why a death penalty is never a good idea.

As for justice, I don't believe justice is served by executing this guy. Stepping back from this case in particular, and looking at the death penalty in general, numerous innocent people have been sentenced to death by the state over recent years. So no, the system can't ever be described as "just".

Peterson is not a "monster". Monsters don't exist. Looking at his behavior, I'd say he has sociopathic tendencies. So he can be understood perhaps in terms of the language and concepts of abnormal psychology. But he is most definitely a member of the human species.

When you say it doesn't give you pleasure to see this person put to death, I simply don't believe you. I think in fact the idea of him being killed gives you a hard-on. You are lusting for the death of another member of our human species. You mislabel this a desire for justice, actually it can be more correctly labelled as blood lust. 🙂

You are free to believe as you wish, but there isn't a trace of bloodlust in me. I abhor violence, I find it an affront to the civilized, rational man. But the truth remains: Not all men are rational and civilized, and there is sometimes little or nothing you can do to change the way these people are.

I'm sorry that your own hate and misdirected anger lead you to see things as you do.

Jason

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: sixone

Originally posted by: aidanjm
I do wonder exactly what is so "heinous" about this crime. Is it because Lacy was so fun loving, so giving, so pretty, so vivacious, so 'full of life'?? Would this story have even made the news if Lacy had been a skanky prostitute or drug addict?

:brokenheart:

Yes, it's so easy to care when the victim is a pretty, pregnant cheer leader type.

Where are the "broken hearts" when the victims [of murder] are prostitutes, drug addicts, other assorted outcasts of society?

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
So it's all about the baaaaby, is it?

To be honest, I don't know how to reply to a person who claims to "respect life" and "cherish its infinite beauty and possibilities" and yet so obviously lusts for the death of another human being.

No, it isn't all about the baby. It's about the fact that human beings, INDIVIDUALLY, have certain *natural* rights. Among these are LIFE, LIBERTY and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. Scott Peterson deprived his wife of all three of these major classes of rights. As appropriate consequence, his rights are forfeit. Man's rights are derived from his nature as a creature of REASON; when he abandons his reason, he must, in due course, abandon his rights as well.

Again, I have no lust for blood. I have nothing but sorrow for the three tragic losses of life in this scenario, and an odd failure to understand where your anger and animosity come from or how they have come to be directed at me.

Jason

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: aidanjm
I think it is important for all decent people to remain vocal in their opposition to the death penalty, and to continue articulating the numerous reasons why a death penalty is never a good idea.

As for justice, I don't believe justice is served by executing this guy. Stepping back from this case in particular, and looking at the death penalty in general, numerous innocent people have been sentenced to death by the state over recent years. So no, the system can't ever be described as "just".

Peterson is not a "monster". Monsters don't exist. Looking at his behavior, I'd say he has sociopathic tendencies. So he can be understood perhaps in terms of the language and concepts of abnormal psychology. But he is most definitely a member of the human species.

When you say it doesn't give you pleasure to see this person put to death, I simply don't believe you. I think in fact the idea of him being killed gives you a hard-on. You are lusting for the death of another member of our human species. You mislabel this a desire for justice, actually it can be more correctly labelled as blood lust. 🙂

You are free to believe as you wish, but there isn't a trace of bloodlust in me. I abhor violence, I find it an affront to the civilized, rational man. But the truth remains: Not all men are rational and civilized, and there is sometimes little or nothing you can do to change the way these people are.

I'm sorry that your own hate and misdirected anger lead you to see things as you do.

Jason

You're the one lusting for Peterson's death, but you accuse me of "hate"...?

Clearly you don't "abhor violence", because you are here advocating for the most extreme form of violence, which is the taking of another person's life. You actually WANT that to happen, you WANT the death of another human being to occur. That looks like blood lust to me.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: sixone

Originally posted by: aidanjm
I do wonder exactly what is so "heinous" about this crime. Is it because Lacy was so fun loving, so giving, so pretty, so vivacious, so 'full of life'?? Would this story have even made the news if Lacy had been a skanky prostitute or drug addict?

:brokenheart:

Yes, it's so easy to care when the victim is a pretty, pregnant cheer leader type.

Where are the "broken hearts" when the victims are prostitutes, drug addicts, other assorted outcasts of society?

Listen. My parents were drug addicts. My father was one of those "disenfranchised" Vietnam Vets who was completely screwed in the head (and remains so to this day). I have *nothing* but sympathy for these people, but while that remains true it is also true that their status as "outcasts" does not give them the special privilege to destroy the lives of those who are not "outcasts".

And please, try to remember that many times these "outcasts" are not such because anyone cast them out but because they gave up ON THEMSELVES. I have two sisters who fall into this category. Both had the intelligence and capability to make their lives productive and happy; both abandoned that potential in favor of drugs, poverty and illegitimate children by fathers they barely knew.

Jason

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: sixone

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: deejayshakur

Originally posted by: loki8481
ah. because as everyone knows, the only way to make up for two deaths is to add on a third.

let's say he murdered your wife--does he live or die?

he lives. of course he lives.

I'm against the death penalty 100%. part of the whole Christian thing. punishing murder with murder solves nothing.

It's too late for a solution. Laci and Connor are DEAD. All we can do now is prevent his hurting anyone else.

Find me a statistic on how many people break out of super max prisons 🙂 There goes your "hurting anyone else" 😀

Capital punishment is state-sanctioned vengeance. A lot of people have no problem with that, but nobody can find a practical reason to endorse it, and so we always go back to the revenge, which is all it's about. In some ways it's frankly childish that people would want to put somebody to death for something. "But he started it!".

Who cares what aperson would do if it was their wife? A guy on the radio today, over $2k, was basically threatening to break out a gun and you know I could really sympathize with his position. Hell, if I was in it I might have wanted to do crazy things too, but it doesn't make it right. No justice system can base itself upon the fury of a victim's family member. Get real!

I am personally perplexed as to how a nation that consists of so many christians can at the same time so widely endorse capital punishment. I can't imagine that Jesus would encourage it. It's essentially taking the role of God and ending a life. Besides breaking a commandment outright, it is vindictive and merciless. I didn't want to pose that problem in another thread, because it will probably collapse into uselessness.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
You're the one lusting for Peterson's death, but you accuse me of "hate"...?

Clearly you don't "abhor violence", because you are here advocating for the most extreme form of violence, which is the taking of another person's life. You actually WANT that to happen, you WANT the death of another human being to occur. That looks like blood lust to me.

I lust for no one's death; Scott Peterson's death will not be violent, it will be the prick of a needle and the gentle falling off to sleep. I doubt his wife had such a gentle exit.

Again, Scott's life is the third wasted life in this tragedy, and it saddens me that it should be this way, but what would you propose, letting him out on the streets? As it is he will *probably* sit on death row until he dies of natural causes. Life in prison or death, either would be "Just". Neither one will change the tragedy of this situation.

Jason

 

[JavaMomma]

I love how people think the death penalty saves money. While I don't have the data from class (was a while ago). It does not save money to seek the death penalty. It usually costs more to execute these people.

Link
This is something I quickly googled up.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: JavaMomma
I love how people think the death penalty saves money. While I don't have the data from class (was a while ago). It does not save money to seek the death penalty. It usually costs more to execute these people.

Link
This is something I quickly googled up.

I've read that also, and while I am in no way any kind of expert on the matter, I see no reason to dispute the figures. It makes sense to me.

Jason

 

[breweyez]

get it through your heads people...he killed...don?t base your argument on the death of an unborn child

its not about him killing a mother and child............he is a killer

he deserved the death penalty?that?s why he got it?I don?t like seeing people die more than anyone else?but this guy could have got a divorce?but he thought he could get away with murder?he didn?t get away with it


edit - sorry about that lil rant folks.....getting sick of that stupid double murder crap

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: aidanjm
So it's all about the baaaaby, is it?

To be honest, I don't know how to reply to a person who claims to "respect life" and "cherish its infinite beauty and possibilities" and yet so obviously lusts for the death of another human being.

No, it isn't all about the baby. It's about the fact that human beings, INDIVIDUALLY, have certain *natural* rights. Among these are LIFE, LIBERTY and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. Scott Peterson deprived his wife of all three of these major classes of rights. As appropriate consequence, his rights are forfeit. Man's rights are derived from his nature as a creature of REASON; when he abandons his reason, he must, in due course, abandon his rights as well.

Again, I have no lust for blood. I have nothing but sorrow for the three tragic losses of life in this scenario, and an odd failure to understand where your anger and animosity come from or how they have come to be directed at me.

Jason

Rights do not stem from nature or God. Rights are extended to humans, by other humans. We make a collective decision, as a society, as to what those rights should be. The debate here is whether it is ever appropriate for the state to take the life of a citizen. I don't think it is. Maybe you're reading too much into my posts, I do not feel anger or animosity towards you, at most I feel a mild irritation at the sentiments you express in this thread, which I perceive as sanctimonious & hypocritical.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: JavaMomma
I love how people think the death penalty saves money. While I don't have the data from class (was a while ago). It does not save money to seek the death penalty. It usually costs more to execute these people.

Link
This is something I quickly googled up.

That's because the courts are choked with appeals and what not, but that's a necessary check against putting innocents to death - something that has happened in the past, and will happen in the future - something that is, obviously, impossible to take back, unlike freeing somebody from prison.

It saves no money, and it deters no criminals. It's revenge, through and through.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
That's because the courts are choked with appeals and what not, but that's a necessary check against putting innocents to death - something that has happened in the past, and will happen in the future - something that is, obviously, impossible to take back, unlike freeing somebody from prison.

It saves no money, and it deters no criminals. It's revenge, through and through.

I don't know that it deters no criminals; I really can't understand the mind of someone who *would* kill another person in cold blood. I don't think most of us here *could*.

I agree with you that it's revenge; Revenge=Justice, no doubt. It is always right to do what is *just*, though I would never make an argument that you can repair the situation by doing so. It's not about repairing the situation, because the truth is that *no one* can repair it. It's a done deal.

Jason

 

[JavaMomma]

Originally posted by: breweyez
get it through your heads people...he killed...don?t base your argument on the death of an unborn child

its not about him killing a mother and child............he is a killer

he deserved the death penalty?that?s why he got it?I don?t like seeing people die more than anyone else?but this guy could have got a divorce?but he thought he could get away with murder?he didn?t get away with it


edit - sorry about that lil rant folks.....getting sick of that stupid double murder crap

What is to be gain by killing him over locking him away for the rest of his life?

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: Skoorb
That's because the courts are choked with appeals and what not, but that's a necessary check against putting innocents to death - something that has happened in the past, and will happen in the future - something that is, obviously, impossible to take back, unlike freeing somebody from prison.

It saves no money, and it deters no criminals. It's revenge, through and through.

I don't know that it deters no criminals; I really can't understand the mind of someone who *would* kill another person in cold blood. I don't think most of us here *could*.

I agree with you that it's revenge; Revenge=Justice, no doubt. It is always right to do what is *just*, though I would never make an argument that you can repair the situation by doing so. It's not about repairing the situation, because the truth is that *no one* can repair it. It's a done deal.

Jason

I simply fail to see what is gained by putting a person to death then. It solves nothing, it costs more, there's no chance of reprieve, should the case be overturned, and for those who believe in judgement day, it's probably not going to be looked upon favourably that the person being judged sent another to die.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: JavaMomma
What is to be gain by killing him over locking him away for the rest of his life?

I'm not sure that there *is* anything to be gained over locking him away for the rest of his life. That's not *MY* point at any rate, though I can't speak for anyone else. I only ask that Justice be done, and I expect that the jury has done so to the best of their ability.

I cannot summon the arrogance to presume that I, who know only what the news tells me, have any better idea what to think about this issue than the jury who saw the entire case presented to them. I don't relish the thought of Peterson dying any more than I relished the thought of his wife and child dying. The entire affair is a *horrible* situation, one that should never have happened. But it can't be undone now.

Instead of railing one way or the other, we should be looking at this as a moment to look at our own lives, especially the parts that maybe we aren't so fond of, and come to realize that it's never so bad that we have to act in the manner of a murderer. We should reflect on how much potential and beauty life has, and consider ourselves lucky that we have the kinds of lives that can be improved and grown if we just work at it.

Jason

 

[breweyez]

Originally posted by: JavaMomma

Originally posted by: breweyez
get it through your heads people...he killed...don?t base your argument on the death of an unborn child

its not about him killing a mother and child............he is a killer

he deserved the death penalty?that?s why he got it?I don?t like seeing people die more than anyone else?but this guy could have got a divorce?but he thought he could get away with murder?he didn?t get away with it


edit - sorry about that lil rant folks.....getting sick of that stupid double murder crap

What is to be gain by killing him over locking him away for the rest of his life?

to be cruel....money
to be kind...sanity

many other reasons...I am sure you can argue the other side too....I really don?t want to hear it...I think he should die....but he will probably keep firing his lawyer, and will be alive another 20 years anyway

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: sixone

Originally posted by: aidanjm
I do wonder exactly what is so "heinous" about this crime. Is it because Lacy was so fun loving, so giving, so pretty, so vivacious, so 'full of life'?? Would this story have even made the news if Lacy had been a skanky prostitute or drug addict?

:brokenheart:

Yes, it's so easy to care when the victim is a pretty, pregnant cheer leader type.

Where are the "broken hearts" when the victims are prostitutes, drug addicts, other assorted outcasts of society?

Listen. My parents were drug addicts. My father was one of those "disenfranchised" Vietnam Vets who was completely screwed in the head (and remains so to this day). I have *nothing* but sympathy for these people, but while that remains true it is also true that their status as "outcasts" does not give them the special privilege to destroy the lives of those who are not "outcasts".

And please, try to remember that many times these "outcasts" are not such because anyone cast them out but because they gave up ON THEMSELVES. I have two sisters who fall into this category. Both had the intelligence and capability to make their lives productive and happy; both abandoned that potential in favor of drugs, poverty and illegitimate children by fathers they barely knew.

Jason

When the murdered person is a prostitute, a drug addict, whatever, where are the nationwide out-pourings of grief, sadness, etc.? Human beings are murdered every day, in horrible ways. And most of those murders do not get coverage in the mainstream media. Yes, I am suspicious at this outpouring of sadness, grief re: Lacy Peterson. There is something self-serving, self-indulgent, hypocritical about it. How is this crime any more heinous than the huge numbers of equally vicious crimes that essentially go uremarked upon?

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: JavaMomma
What is to be gain by killing him over locking him away for the rest of his life?

I'm not sure that there *is* anything to be gained over locking him away for the rest of his life. That's not *MY* point at any rate, though I can't speak for anyone else. I only ask that Justice be done, and I expect that the jury has done so to the best of their ability.

I cannot summon the arrogance to presume that I, who know only what the news tells me, have any better idea what to think about this issue than the jury who saw the entire case presented to them. I don't relish the thought of Peterson dying any more than I relished the thought of his wife and child dying. The entire affair is a *horrible* situation, one that should never have happened. But it can't be undone now.

Instead of railing one way or the other, we should be looking at this as a moment to look at our own lives, especially the parts that maybe we aren't so fond of, and come to realize that it's never so bad that we have to act in the manner of a murderer. We should reflect on how much potential and beauty life has, and consider ourselves lucky that we have the kinds of lives that can be improved and grown if we just work at it.

Jason

Why exactly is it "just" to put him to death? What are you basing it on?

 

[StageLeft]

How is this crime any more heinous than the huge numbers of equally vicious crimes that essentially go uremarked upon?

It's no worse than many. But that doesn't belittle its severity; the others deserve more attention perhaps. The peterson case is a media darling for people with not much else going on to watch - like a real life soap opera. OJ was a big one, this is a big one, michael jackson might be the next. It's not markedly different than any other number of murders. It's just what people happened to have an interest in, and people are not able to have an interest in many trials at once, but they can keep their interest through one well enough.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
When the murdered person is a prostitute, a drug addict, whatever, where are the nationwide out-pourings of grief, sadness, etc.? Human beings are murdered every day, in horrible ways. And most of those murders do not get coverage in the mainstream media. Yes, I am suspicious at this outpouring of sadness, grief re: Lacy Peterson. There is something self-serving, self-indulgent, hypocritical about it. How is this crime any more heinous than the huge numbers of equally vicious crimes that essentially go uremarked upon?

You're absolutely correct that there are a LOT of murders and other wrongs that happen *every day* that go unnoticed by the world at large. Those scenarios are *no less sad*, and I agree that we should take more heed of them. Human life should never be taken lightly, and we should always reflect carefully on the situations that lead to such takings.

Jason

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Why exactly is it "just" to put him to death? What are you basing it on?

Please elaborate, your question alone doesn't make a lot of sense 🙂

Jason

 

[PatboyX]

death isnt really a punishment.