As unbelievable as it may seem, there is yet another story like the ones above. From San Francisco.
Stop the world, I want to get off. 
:mad:
My instinctive response is to look for my shotgun. This scum-sucker shouldn’t be littering-up my planet. On second thought, he might be recoverable, in which case, we should at least try, although I can’t see how he’d live with himself and the knowledge of what he’s done, should he ever be brought to the same level of compassion that most people posess, which would make rehabilitiation a torture. Killing him then would be a mercy, IMO.
So, on last thought, where’s my shotgun…?
Bullshit. This is why the no cruel and unusual punishment clause exists. You do not get a moral right to do whatever you want to a criminal. If you are hurting someone for no other reason than because you want them to suffer and you enjoy it, that is not moral. That is the same act of crime that was committed. Should not you, then, as you wish to throw away a person’s rights, in turn, lose yours?
There is nothing to be gained from torturing this person and quite a bit to be lost. If you are so angry but yet fantasize about torturing others, I think you need to consider that such violent impulses are not given a moral ‘get out of jail free’ card simply because of the intended victim.
The vast majority of atrocities are committed by people who think that the victims deserve it in some way. Just because you see this individual in a certain way does not make you any better.
No.
Okay, it is a bit contradictory. I think criminals should be rehabilitated, not punished. But, our system isn’t set up to rehabilitate, it is set up to punish. So, since he will never receive treatment, there should be some way that he has to face what he did, thus, the pictures. That’s really what I meant, i just let my disgust color the wording a bit.
Think about this:
Lets say that there are 1,000 cases of child abuse this severe in the US (I have no basis for this assumption, but my gut tells me its more like 50,000 or 500,000).
Obviously, most of these 1,000 abusers don’t view jail time as a sufficient deterrent to engaging in this horrendous activity. Let’ make a conservative assumption that 10% of these 1,000 abusers view severe, prolonged, disfiguring torture as a real punishment with deterrent effect. A handful of well-publicized, legalized, severe torture at the hands of the proper authorities serves to associate this severe punishment with this horrendous crime.
By torturing, let’s say 5, of these sub-human beings, 10% of these potential assholes think twice before torturing defenseless children. Humanity as a whole is still ahead by 95 non-tortured individuals.
Sounds like a stretch, I know, but I kind of like the math.
And please, don’t ask me to provide cites for any of the statistics above. I made assumptions for the sake of argument. I tend to think the numbers above could be increased by a factor of 20, but chose to keep them extremely conservative.
I don’t believe you should get to do “whatever you want” to a criminal. However, a person who has chosen to disregard another person’s rights loses whatever protection that right gave him. A thief has no claim to property and a murderer has no claim to his life. Now, what I consider an immoral act is one that violates another person’s rights. But McBride, by violating his son’s right to life, has decided that that right does not apply to him. We, by torturing or killing him, are not throwing away his rights…he did that on his own.
You might argue inherency of rights; that the right to life is provided to all peoples at all times regardless of what anyone thinks. But consider where these rights come from. If you say God or any other deity, I can’t argue with that, but I do ask for some logic behind why you think any deity would grant such a thing to us. The other answer is that society has decided that certain things are rights. In our society, that would include life, property and freedom. These are all very fundamental ideals that all those in society believe in; however, they only apply to those in it. This is why we can kill wild animals but not pets: one is considered part of our society and one isn’t. However, should your neighbor’s pit bull decide to tear out your paperboy’s throat, no one would object to putting the dog to sleep because its actions removed it from our society. Another example has taken place on a larger scale: Afghanistan’s Taliban government decided to disrepect America’s rights and so they were removed from the global community, enabling us to bomb the shit out of them and remain a moral country. Striking out against someone in your society is forbidden, but anyone else is fair game…and it’s open season on McBride.
And I apologize for any lack of coherency and the gratuitous use of the words “rights” and “society”. oh wait…this is the pit…fuck it.
Ah, how interesting. Confronted with a horrible crime, some folks think the appropriate governmental action should be response with a horrible crime. Actually, a series of horrible crimes.
Sometimes I wish I really believed in hell because then I could look forward to something like this for this waste of flesh.
“Mr McBride… welcome to hell. Yes, I am Satan and I will be your host for all eternity. You must be tired from your trip. Would you like a cigarette? Care for a bite perhaps?”
Before he can respond McBride is slammed onto a table and besieged by demons which proceed to slowly burn every inch of his body and devour him in very small bites. When there is nothing left of his body they start the whole process over again… and again… and again…
And when he screams for mercy the only screams that he hears will be those of little Dillon emanating from his own mouth.
God will forgive McBride, and I have no basis to complain about that.
I just wish we would arrange the meeting sooner rather than later.
Regards,
Shodan
Sure, I would be happy if we were getting rid of people like this Mc Bride.
I would also be very happy if we were rid of the (apparently numerous) people who would enjoy torturing him or knowing he’s tortured.
Seeing so much people making these comments makes me sick. But I should already know that this planet is full of butchers who are ready to take any chance to make people suffer as long as they think they deserve it.
I’m sure if you read the crime statistics you would find that abuse of this kind is not rare, but common.
With many others in this thread, my first reaction was to say, “Yeah, hurt the sonofabitch! Hurt him!” But I know we, as a society, can’t really do that. Cruelty only begets more cruelty. I think most of us who are temporarily moved to extreme thoughts by some heinous criminal act would probably elect to keep the Eighth Amendment when we calmed down and thought about it.
How about punishment along the lines of “an eye for eye”? If you shot your victim to death; you’re shot. If you beat your victim to death with a baseball bat; you’re beat to death with a baseball bat. (However it’s the executioner’s choice whether to use a wood or aluminum bat) :eek: Etc, etc, etc.