Truly Unbelieveable Cruelty!

[Optimus]

shiner:

I feel the same anger and outrage you do, believe me. My gut wants to yell "Fry her!" - but I override that.

Killing her won't:
A) Bring him back
B) Discourage others from killing
C) be any more effective at removing her as a threat

I want her to know what she did - I want it to haunt her every waking moment. I want her to see his dying face as she falls asleep and wake to memories of his screams and pleading for help.

If I ruled the world, she would live the rest of her days in an 8x8 cell, with no cellmates, no friends, no visits, no TV. On her cell walls would be pictures of this poor guy - when he was alive with friends and family, and then after what she did to him. She would never be paroled, never get out.

 

[Croton]

siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiick

 

[Viper GTS]

To those who believe she should be left alive to feel guilt every waking hour of her remaining natural life...

Think about this:

If she did not feel the conviction necessary to pull out a phone & call 911, If she could close the door & walk away with his screams fading behind her, what makes you think she is capable of feeling guilt?

Viper GTS

 

[b0mbrman]

Damn...what a jerk

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

<< To those who believe she should be left alive to feel guilt every waking hour of her remaining natural life...

Think about this:

If she did not feel the conviction necessary to pull out a phone & call 911, If she could close the door & walk away with his screams fading behind her, what makes you think she is capable of feeling guilt?

Viper GTS >>



Exactly, the only guilt this woman will feel will be over not what she did, but that she got caught.

 

[Optimus]

She is capable, she is just so predominantly selfish that she placed her own "staying out of trouble" over his life.

I can't fathom being that selfishly evil, but then she also did E and drove drunk, so its all part of her life.

In prison we remove EVERYTHING. She no longer can hide behind her fear of "getting into trouble" and "loosing everything she has". She can no longer drown out her guilt and humanity in booze and E (solitary - no prison drugs).

No TV, no friends.

No distractions.

Nothing day in and day out but her own thoughts... her guilt will awaken and grow... and grow. In the new, sudden, and harsh silence of her life she will hear his screams, and see his face.


She is right now incapable of guilt and compassion.

We will make leave her with nothing but her guilt and memories.

She will feel it, believe me, she will.

 

[pyonir]

<< Nothing day in and day out but her own thoughts... her guilt will awaken and grow... and grow. In the new, sudden, and harsh silence of her life she will hear his screams, and see his face.


She is right now incapable of guilt and compassion.

We will make leave her with nothing but her guilt and memories.

She will feel it, believe me, she will. >>



no she won't. read "Inside the Criminal Mind" by Stanton Samenow. Read any book by John Douglas or Roy Hazelwood. Read "Why they Kill" by Richard Rhodes. numerous criminal studies have been done and have shown time and time again people like this feel no remore or guilt, and most often NEVER will. you can take it all away but the only thing she will ever feel regret or guilt for is being put in jail...she won't think about what she did to get there...only what she is doing in there.

 

[Amused]

<< its sad how some people think they have the power to decide who lives and who dies >>



WAKE UP TO REALITY!!

Everyone has the power to decide who lives and who dies. I could walk up to Joe Blow on the street and shoot him in the head.

What separates us is how we use this power; to defend, or to kill for no reason.

BTW, how would you have had us deal with Nazi Germany? Sing them a song and attempt to talk them out of killing innocents and oppressing whole countries?

Grow up and face reality.

 

[Optimus]

pyonir:

Different motivation - there is a good percentage of the population that kill and will never regret. For them, the punishment of being alone, captive, and having NOTHING but plain food and concrete walls will have to suffice. Let their lost freedom eat at them for the rest of thier lives.

This lady? Remove her self-perserving fear and anything she can use to hide from the guilt and I'm sure she will feel it.


Executed people feel no guilt either. Making them feel guilty isn't my goal, its just a nice side effect for a number of them.

Why execute them?

 

[Optimus]

Amused - I know you are addressing bigdog, but as I'm not in favor of the death penalty either, I thought I'd respond from my POV.

War is different - we are directly defending ourselves and others from aggressors. There were days when the death penalty did the same thing too.

But today we are capable of locking people up securely in such a way that threat is reduced to almost non-existant levels. By keeping them solitary, they can't harm other prisoners. With technology, we can protect the guards from them almost completely. With no parole and the chances of escape astronomically small, they will never get out.

We can now safely defend ourselves from murderous criminals with non-lethal means. Given that option, we should use it.

We do not have such an option against Al Quida or terrorists, so we should be blowing the snot out of them.


Believe me, I'm not a pacifist, I just have a very definite line drawn about when we should kill:

War in self-defense = yes.
War in defense of the weak/innocent* = yes.
Personal Self Defense = yes.
Defense of others (weak/innocent*) = yes.

To discourage future murders = No.
To save taxpayers money = No.
To protect society from murderers when we are finally able to do so through non-lethal means = No.
etc...


(* definition of "innocent" is a whole 'nuther discussion)

 

[PlatinumGold]

The real question is:

DO you believe that she can be rehabilitated??

Can she turn her life around and somehow make up for the EVIL (and what she did is EVIL no two ways about it) that she did here?

How you answer those questions determine where you stand on the death penalty.

I really believe there are only 2 possible options here depending on what you believe.

1. If you believe that she can not be rehabilitated, Kill her, Destroy her, don't even give her the chance for a parole and don't waste our tax dollars keeping her alive in a meaningless existence.

2. If you believe that SHE CAN be rehabilitated, then put her in jail, let her get her life back together and place her back in society.

My personal opinion, FRY HER. but i think even the 2nd of the 2 options i suggested would be better than LIFE IMPRISONMENT.

 

[LuNoTiCK]

We need to use some cruel and unusual punishment. Would change so many things. You could just lock her up in a small cell with no light and barely any food for the rest of her life though.

 

[pyonir]

Optimus: i completely respect your desicion and thank you for not being an ass about it and for talking about it in a mature manner (it isn't often someone does that on the boards).

My only argument is: do you believe in an afterlife? because if you do, isn't loss of life the ulitmate punishment? if it is so widely argued that life is a gift, isn't it the ultimate to take that gift away? i respect your viewpoints and i only hope you can respect mine and understand where i am coming from.
a little off the topic but to state an example: i don't see the reason to keep a person like Jeffery Dahmer alive (yes, i know he is dead but this is an example so bear with me). the man has no remorse. no guilt. WILL do it again. but is in prison for life with no possibility for parole. ok so there is tight security and let's say for arguments sake that he will NEVER escape. what good is it using tax payers dollars to keep him alive? he contributes nothing to society. some argue that it costs more to carry out the death penalty. last i checked a cut of rope was under a dollar at the local hardware store.

regardless i have had this discussion a million times as i am sure you have. i'm not going to change your mind and you aren't going to change mine. guess it is just best to agree to disagree.

Sorry for the off topic comments and taking this to a different place.

 

[sheselectric]

if she consciously (and soberly) let this man suffer and die, and she is a full-grown adult, there's no way she can be rehabilitated. she is sick and twisted, and doesn't deserve to live.

 

[Optimus]

Platinum:


<< DO you believe that she can be rehabilitated?? >>


Possibly, doesn't really matter. She can become as sorry as the hills and good as a lamb - she still ows her lifetime of freedom in punishment.


<< Can she turn her life around and somehow make up for the EVIL (and what she did is EVIL no two ways about it) that she did here? >>


Same as above, but the only way she can atone for the evil is through serving a lifetime of confinement. That is just.


<< 1. If you believe that she can not be rehabilitated, Kill her, Destroy her, don't even give her the chance for a parole and don't waste our tax dollars keeping her alive in a meaningless existence. >>


Here is where you and I disagree - I believe all human life has an intrinsic value, and that it should only be taken when there is no other viable choice (i.e. its ok in self-defense, defense of others, just war).

I do not believe any amount of money in tax dollars is worth taking her life.



<< 2. If you believe that SHE CAN be rehabilitated, then put her in jail, let her get her life back together and place her back in society. >>



Like I said - she can become mother theresa in Jail for all its worth - good for her. She still owes society a lifetime punishment in jail for what she did.


<< My personal opinion, FRY HER. but i think even the 2nd of the 2 options i suggested would be better than LIFE IMPRISONMENT. >>


Life in jail is her just puinishment for what she did.

pyonir

Thanks, I'm glad this discussion has been friendly too.



<< My only argument is: do you believe in an afterlife? because if you do, isn't loss of life the ulitmate punishment? >>


I do believe in an afterlife - but that is out of our control.
All we can do here is determine justice during our lives and in our society.


<< if it is so widely argued that life is a gift, isn't it the ultimate to take that gift away? >>


Yes, but it is also beyond our right to do so without the best of reasons.



<< i respect your viewpoints and i only hope you can respect mine and understand where i am coming from. >>



I sure can - I used to be pro-death penalty too. My gut reaction still very much is!



<< a little off the topic but to state an example: i don't see the reason to keep a person like Jeffery Dahmer alive (yes, i know he is dead but this is an example so bear with me). the man has no remorse. no guilt. WILL do it again. but is in prison for life with no possibility for parole. ok so there is tight security and let's say for arguments sake that he will NEVER escape. what good is it using tax payers dollars to keep him alive? he contributes nothing to society. some argue that it costs more to carry out the death penalty. last i checked a cut of rope was under a dollar at the local hardware store. >>


Again, it is a fundamental belief of mine that a person's life is worth more than money, or what they contribute to society, etc. Handicapped people can cost taxpayers a bundle and may well contribute nothing - but they have that most fundamental of human rights - life. So do criminals, as long as we have the means to not have to execute them.

Having the means to avoid the death penalty is key - we haven't always had these means. When we didn't, or through circumstances don't have them now - we may well need to execute persistant threats (murderers).

Again, your definition of the intrinsic value of human life plays heavily in the decision.


<< regardless i have had this discussion a million times as i am sure you have. i'm not going to change your mind and you aren't going to change mine. guess it is just best to agree to disagree. >>


I'm fine with that. Although I should remind you - I changed my mind on the death penalty, and I could again. We should always question, examine, and debate issues like it... no one is ever right about everything.

But yeah, of course I'm fine with us disagreeing - you've been nothing but pleasant and respectful in this debate and my hats off to you, sir.

Cheers!

 

[PlatinumGold]

optimus

judging from your posts here it's obvious we will not agree on this issue.

I don't agree that there is intrinsic value to life, especially a life that you lock up forever.

since this is a democracy, however, how taxpayer money is spent should be decided by the people. it is my opinion that this is not a good way to spend taxpayer dollars.

also, it raises the question, is the purpose of our penal system to PUNISH or to REHABILITATE. I actually don't have an answer or an opinion yet on this but it seems that it is an important one.

 

[pyonir]

<< pyonir
Again, your definition of the intrinsic value of human life plays heavily in the decision.


<< regardless i have had this discussion a million times as i am sure you have. i'm not going to change your mind and you aren't going to change mine. guess it is just best to agree to disagree. >>


I'm fine with that. Although I should remind you - I changed my mind on the death penalty, and I could again. We should always question, examine, and debate issues like it... no one is ever right about everything.

But yeah, of course I'm fine with us disagreeing - you've been nothing but pleasant and respectful in this debate and my hats off to you, sir.

Cheers! >>



that maybe where our disagreement lies. i don't believe in the afterlife and i think my "definition of the intrinsic value of human life" is the difference. and i agree that discussion and question are two good reasons to talk about it.

anyway...hats off to you as well...

 

[mithrandir2001]

<<

<<

<< This is why we have the death penalty. >>


The death penalty is never acceptable. No matter what she did, we cannot respond with more death and violence. >>



Why not? >>


The application of death should not result from our judicial system and I cannot endorse state-sponsored murder of incarcerated criminals. The death penalty is unbefitting of a modern, civil society and the existence of such a dire measure points to a tear in a society's moral fiber. A civil society does not lower itself to the level of its worst members. It does not respond to evil with evil. It overcomes evil through benevolence. A lifetime sentence without parole is as harsh a penalty as humanely conceivable and a society should feel no shame for granting mercy to its most violent offenders of law, if mercy means simply stopping the violence and refusing to kill off its problem citizens.

This is different from war, as war has a different set of rules. Osama and his Al-Queda supporters, for example, should be killed for their crimes against humanity...on the "battlefield". But if they were captured and sent through our legal justice system, I believe that they should not receive the death penalty. The application of death and destruction is reserved for armies and military, not the court system.

It may not be a well-received opinion, but it has to do with reflecting on your ideals and being true to them. As a Libertarian, I think the individual is supreme and no action of the state should be able to terminate one's life, except in actions of war. A criminal in a jail cell cannot continue to wage war against society. Their evil actions are committed, nothing can change that now. Some will say that allowing a criminal to live isn't "fair", but who said anything with fell actions can be fair? Is the death penalty fair to a criminal's family? Is killing somebody somehow going to make the situation better, by making it more fair for the victim? Is death the only possible fair outcome in these situations?

"Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends." Yes, a Tolkien reference.


<< Shouldn't you be somewhere sipping chamomile tea and hugging a tree? >>


I am drinking Diet Coke with Lemon. I guess that makes me a Birkenstock-wearing Berkeley grad.

 

That's rather unfortunate.

 

[mithrandir2001]

<< DO you believe that she can be rehabilitated?? >>


I don't know. THAT'S why we should not kill her. We cannot judge when we don't have all the answers ourselves.


<< Can she turn her life around and somehow make up for the EVIL (and what she did is EVIL no two ways about it) that she did here? >>


Again, I don't know. Being anti-death penalty is not about hoping she can be rehabbed and sent back into society...if she is sentenced to life imprisonment without parole, nobody is presuming she could be rehabbed. It's about removing primal, visceral emotion from the application of justice.


<< don't waste our tax dollars keeping her alive in a meaningless existence. >>


Killing somebody in the death chamber generally costs more than keeping them alive.


<< My personal opinion, FRY HER. but i think even the 2nd of the 2 options i suggested would be better than LIFE IMPRISONMENT. >>


I'm glad you know everything there is to know to decide that death is the only feasible outcome.


<< is the purpose of our penal system to PUNISH or to REHABILITATE >>


Life imprisonment is unquestionably a method of punishment, not rehabilitation. We do not need the death penalty in order to punish harshly.

 

[Stifko]

That's rather unfortunate.

Thats an understatement. This makes throwing fried chicken garbage outta your car look like no big deal. She wasn't even teenager and a nurse's aid to boot! Aren't they supposed to help ppl? That story is really sickening, and hit a nerve for me.

 

[Vic]

<< That really sucks. Drugs are bad. >>



Drugs had nothing to do with this.
This terrible incident resulted from a complete and utter lack of a sense of responsibility. Fearful that she might get a DUI or similar for hitting the man, she believed it preferable that he die rather than she have to pay whatever small punishment that she would have had to pay for just hitting him.
This is becoming far more common in our society and possibly the world as a whole. Many people do not care how their actions may affect others and absolutely refuse to accept responsibility for their actions. In extreme cases, like this one, some people will, out of fear of being held responsible, afflict additional harm or purposefully withhold care that is needed because of their own actions.

Anyway, that's a terrible way of die. Somehow, to me, a murder like this is much worse than if she had put a gun to his head and shot him just to take his wallet. At least in that case the death is quick and the life was worth as least as much as a wallet. In this case, Ms. Mallard demonstrated that she has absolutely no respect for human life and human suffering at all, except possibly for her own.

 

[PlatinumGold]

Drugs had nothing to do with this.
This terrible incident resulted from a complete and utter lack of a sense of responsibility. Fearful that she might get a DUI or similar for hitting the man, she believed it preferable that he die rather than she have to pay whatever small punishment that she would have had to pay for just hitting him.


yup. this was clearly murder. premeditated.

she might as well have sent him to the hospital, got a gun, went to the hospital and SHOT him. it would have beent he exact same thing.

even worse is that lawyer calling this a case of hit and run. OMFG. I hate lawyers like that.

 

[Vic]

Optimus, you are wrong. She will never feel guilt. Don't get me wrong. She will suffer in jail and solitary will be a terrible thing for her. But she will never feel guilt. I can see how you would get confused though. The remorse she will feel will not be from having murdered out of indifference and petty selfishness, but from having been caught.
Thankfully, that last trip to the Chair, which they will have to drag her kicking and screaming and crying, will end all that.

 

[yakko]

She needs the death penalty.