Human Garbage Gets Justice

[ghost]

But he'll probably spend 20 years in appeals while he prefects the role of wife.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/06/24/boston-marathon-bomber-death-sentence/29206711/

 

[nkotb]

There are no grounds for appeal. He's guilty as sin and never denied it.

 

[ghost]

In that case we'll look forward to long painful botched execution.

 

[ARbound]

Time for an unpopular opinion.

We are better than this because we are Americans, or at least we're supposed to be better than this.

You can not morally or logically argue with the right hand that murder and is wrong, while sentencing someone to death with the left and claim the action is just. I am convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the convicted individual and his brother were responsible for the terrorist attack, and horror that followed while pursuing them. However, I am not convinced that sentencing someone to death is justice.

This isn't 1754 BC in Babylon nor are we a nomadic Jewish tribe wandering the Sinai peninsula. Unlike repayment for theft of money, killing someone will not revive the men, women, and children who died. It will not make the maimed limbs of those who survived heal or regenerate, and it will not place us as a nation on a moral high ground by saying "this is how we deal with terrorists". If you believe that some people are irredeemable, can not rehabilitated, or they wish not to, that is fine, because although I believe this too, once again, murder conducted by the state will not prevent terrorist attacks from happening again, or increase the likelihood of the convicted or future terrorists/murderers from changing their mind about murdering people.

Being confined to an 8x10 cell, fed terrible food, given no chance to interact with the outside world for 60 years (the average life expectancy is ~78) is quite the punishment. There are no appeals, there is no possibility of parole, there is no martyr: there is sixty years of reflection on the things you have done.

If you believe that we must answer to a higher power for our actions committed during our time on this planet, like I do, then it would seem odd to usurp the role of judge from that power, especially when it comes to the ultimate punishment: to live or to die.

Finally, to murder a person many would consider the personification of evil is easy. It is quick, it is satisfying, and it feels just, but it is nothing more than barbarism at its core. You can kill someone in a more "humane" method like injecting an intentional overdose of medication, but you are still committing murder like they did, we just see it as more sterile and medicalized. Even if you are against lethal injection and embrace the role of judge, jury and executioner and want to burn them alive, you are still committing murder.

Ultimately, as a nation and people we need to make a decision: is murder wrong or not. We can no longer have it both ways, and this is a perfect moment for us to show either American Exceptionalism or American Hypocrisy.

I know which side I fall on, and I honestly hope that whatever higher power there is, mine, his, or yours, finds mercy for this man's troubled soul.

 

[ben]

Being confined to an 8x10 cell, fed terrible food, given no chance to interact with the outside world for 60 years (the average life expectancy is ~78) is quite the punishment. There are no appeals, there is no possibility of parole, there is no martyr: there is sixty years of reflection on the things you have done.

Why does this strike you as a more morally acceptable option? One could advance the possibility of there then being room to free him in the case that an error was committed, which argument you agree is not applicable here. With that issue aside, why do you seem to be more in favor of effectively burying him alive?

Speaking of which, one could ask a bunch of theoretical questions.

• If one could know with perfect certainty that Mr. Tsarnaev would never so much as hurt a fly again, indeed would become Father Theresa, would you be in favor of life imprisonment at a supermax prison with the description you provided?
• Would you be in favor of any incarceration at all? Why or why not?
• Is the point of imprisonment in such a prison, which many would (and do) argue is cruel and dehumanizing, simply preventive or punitive as well?
• When society resorts to punitive coercive measures, is it simply restraining the offender from further offending, is it meant to deter others, or is society adopting a moral standard and imposing it on the unhappy defendant? A bit of all of the above? How much?

Do these issues not demand deep thought and answers before expressing an opinion, even if it is such a popular one as 'abolish all killing'?

 

[ghost]

Ultimately, as a nation and people we need to make a decision: is murder wrong or not. We can no longer have it both ways, and this is a perfect moment for us to show either American Exceptionalism or American Hypocrisy.

The decision was made long ago. it's called law. [you missed it] He was tried in a court and found guilty. Premeditated mass murder. And multiple other unnamed offenses. Acts of terror. His greatest wish is to be a martyr. We should grant that wish.
I as a tax payer do not wish to support this human trash for another 60 years.

 

[Gringoboy]

Arbound, your opening line 'We are better than this because we are Americans' is trite and sanctimonious.
Further, your notion that Americans should offer the other cheek in a biblical sense and further, to show mercy to this fundamentalist, well intentioned though it may be, plays into the hands of those who would wish to destroy your country.
I therefore ask you, if an army of IS fundamentalists were to attack the USA directly, but failed having caused multiple deaths, would you grant them mercy?

 

[scotttswan]

I therefore ask you, if an army of IS fundamentalists were to attack the USA directly, but failed having caused multiple deaths, would you grant them mercy?

It would be the Christian thing to do.

 

[ghost]

It would be the Christian thing to do.

I think the "Christian Thing" would be to mount a Crusade and proceed to kill, rape, loot, pillage, tax and invade.

 

[Noesdeayer]

ARbound If I am mistaken,please excuse me.I believe that you are Canadian and not an American (a U.S. citizen).Therefore,why do you say" as a nation and a people we...."? I might agree in general terms with what you say but please clarify this doubt for me.If you are Canadian,please answer my previous question to you.Would you like another Harper administration?