I do not see anyones reasoning here in the death penalty being bad. Life IS a human right, But when they try to kill other people, They lose that right. This is a no good criminal, Why does he deserve a cushy life in a cell where he gets to read all day, Surf the web, And drink soda? And even the death penalty is pretty soft! Get a big nice meal then take a nap you don't wake up from? No. Put this man to death for his crimes. He deserves it in every way. Ps: I messed up my answer in the poll. My answer is a resounding YES
Life without parole means he will be in jail for the rest of his life without parole (the chance to get out of jail). As for what you said about the conditions being harsh, I suspect that he will be killed in prison. It might not happen, but if he is not heavily guarded whos to say that a relative or friend of an injured or killed person is in the same jail as him, and said person wants vengeance. He probably will not be out of his "cage" much if he is sent to prison, just due to the fact that there are alot of blood thirsty killers in high up prisons and alot of people who just like punching things.
Where he is going? No such thing as Soda or surfing the web. You lose those privileges at a certain point, they are not rights so anyone can take them away from you. I agree with you though, he needs the death penalty.
Terrorism in the US is more often than not carried out by hollywood. yes, it happens but generally the mainstream news doesn't actually want you to know about genuine threats and would rather tell a juicy story or make one up. I, nor anyone here actually knows what happened nor who did what or what intentions were had. Either way, a man that has done such acts as this MSM(mainstream media) figure has been accused of would be death in most cultures and countries, worse(as marshmallow would wish) in some countries and cultures, others would imprison them for life and in the US as backwards as literally everything is he will probably be deemed mentally ill and need rehabilitation, later there will be a law protecting terrorists that passes only because it gives a raise to congress. Personally, lock the man up in gitmo, if he even exists.
Everyone should view this movie, It taught me alot about the jury box and what they go through. Free on YouTube from many channels so I think it is okay to post here (not pirated). I know this has nothing to do with the case but it might open your mind some more.
Here is what my dad said, "He should be put in a hole and a bomb like what he used to bomb all of those people, if he lives he lives, if he dies, he is dead.l
To anyone who is confused by the survey statistics, many people view a life sentence without parole as the necessary step because Death would be 'too easy'. You are talking about him being locked up and having to deal with the guilt/abuse for what he did. It's no joke that our prison systems aren't the safest place to be. Along with the danger, this guy now gets to live for free. He doesn't have to pay for his meals or a place to sleep at night. It's kinda unfair in that sense, but I won't go there in this thread... On the other hand, the death penalty isn't instant. They are placed on a list that they can sometimes live up to 20 years before actually being put to death. He would still suffer/live off the taxpayer money for a while, but eventually he'd be killed. To some that eventual peace of mind that an 'eye for an eye' rings true is what they are looking for. Personally, I'd want him to suffer. This wasn't even a structured hit on a specific group of people. The people killed/hurt were innocent bystanders in no position of power to warrant being on any type of target list. I'd also go a step further and won't elaborate as to what that means, but like I said, I'm a bit sadistic when it comes to people that hurt innocents. For example, I kinda wish that the co-pilot that recently crashed that plane into the mountains had survived instead of getting his 'instant death penalty' escape. His 1 life was in no way equal to the 15o+ others on board and yet, that's his 'trial' result. Doesn't seem fair imo.
This is just what I've been thinking: What if your are/family or friend of a victim I bet you, you would want him dead and you'd be happy about his death and you would probably be glad that he is gone. Then if you know what is going on and what is happing but you think he should live because he will (hopefully) know that what he did was very wrong and that one day in prison, where he will never leave, he will eventually die and it would be done. But going back to the death side of this I remember reading in a book that said why not kill someone all your doing is ending their life short, one day they will eventually die or something along those lines but after reading this I'm on the fence I will edit this when I'm off it.
We (the US) likely kill many terrorists a day over in the Middle East. Tsarnaev is the same kind of scum that these terrorists are. I see no reason to not give him equal treatment. He also could be an inspiration to other homegrown terrorists, and him being alive/physical makes him a sort of idol. By removing him, we can reduce his idol effect, just like we did with Bin Laden.
I don't think humanity has much of a use for someone with such low morality. If he does get life in prison, innocent taxpayers are paying for a terrorist to sit in prison, get 3 meals a day, and have a roof over his head while many of our veterans have to struggle to survive in their own country. There are no words to describe the grief this man has caused for the injured, and families of the injured, and he doesn't appear to feel a bit of remorse. I don't see any reason to keep someone like this around, but as said above, death penalty is like an 'easy escape.' If he was more empathetic, and showed regret for his actions, I could see why life in jail would be a more reasonable solution.
No one should be murdered. They had the human right to live a full life. They were innocent people. They didn't deserve to die.
I for one don't think he should be executed, but that's because I disagree with the whole premise of having the death penalty in the first place. Not being an American, I forget sometimes that they still have capital punishment (I say "still", hoping it will be abolished eventually). The concept of killing people as punishment for their crimes seems, to me, incredibly antiquated, and frankly barbaric. Even the "modern" system, with the lethal injections and everything, is flawed in more ways than one, be it the fact that innocent people are being executed, that executions are sometimes botched, or that it costs up to 10x the tax money to have someone executed than to just keep them in prison (yeah). Just because it may feel right to say that a guilty killer should be put to death for killing innocent people, doesn't mean it is right. About 70% of the world's countries have abolished capital punishment, and 18 of the US' 50 states have, too (including Massachusetts, I might add). The death penalty is (hopefully) on its way out, and it surprises me how many of you guys are in favour of it.
I was actually in a debate in this recently. I am very strongly against the death penalty for many reasons, but the main one that hasn't been mentioned yet is the psycological effect of it. People may say they want death, but when hes gone, then what do you have? Nothing. Just a great void, and that thing you wanted doesnt actually make you feel any better. Also, think about the executioner. That person will have to live their lives knowing that they took the life of another human being. Executioners in the past have suffered severe trauma over this. Bottom line, I just dont think death should ever been an option. Sociopaths like him dont view the world as we do, and death seems an unrealistic end to them, so they dont fear it. I say for the sake of justice and closure, lock him in solitary confinement for the rest of his days.
He murdered innocent people. A six year old child. He had his entire life ahead of him. He was cheering on the runners, then what? His small body is torn apart? This man deserves to die for his crimes. He showed no mercy. So why should we?
My bad, lots of text to read. Putting him to death would be merciful. He doesnt fear death, and he never will. It would be like giving him a sleeping pill. Death just doesnt click for sociopaths. But you know what they do fear? Themselves. Being trapped by themselves for their entire life is a worse kind of fate than anything he can imagine.
This doesn't make sense to me. You're saying we should emulate his mercilessness? An act of violence should be received with another act of violence? I'm sorry, but I don't see it that way. I know what he did was unforgivable, and that's why he should be locked up, but since when is stooping to his level and resorting to killing, ourselves, an appropriate response? We mustn't let anger cloud our judgement; we're better than that.
We mustn't let emotions cloud our judgement. Any form of emotion is a danger if it injects itself into the decision process.
I'm on my iPad right now, so I don't really have the ability to type long paragraphs, so I'll leave it at this for tonight: I am against any human being having to receive the death penalty. I am also against any innocent human being being killed for no good reason. I am against death penalties as a whole, however in this case, I do agree that he should receive the death penalt.y as much as I'd like to say he has the right to live (just as anyone else does) he massacred multiple people and injured many others for no good cause and therefore should receive the death penalty. I really don't agree with death penalties at all, but in such a case, I think that yes, he should receive the death penalty.
