First-I am pro-capital punishment, but I am not taking any glee in the fact that McVeigh will die. I don’t know if this will provide McVeigh’s victims families with the closure everyone mentions. However, I think it is unjust that McVeigh be allowed to live and enjoy life. He’ll get his last moment in the sun before his execution, and then he will get his eternity in the ground.
Second-So long as there is no reasonable doubt about McVeigh’s guilt, it does not bother me that he will be deliberately killed in a cold, bureaucratic manner. I’m bothered that 168 people were killed in the same manner. I’m bothered that people are killed for money, or their race or their sexual preference, or because they worked in a convenience store late at night or the million other reasons people are murdered.
Third-If I knew the exact time and date of my death, I would probably feel a great deal of anguish. I would contact my family and friends and tell them goodbye. I would tie up any loose ends. I would probably hurry up and try to finish whatever book I was reading. All the things that McVeigh’s victims did not get to do.
To quote from the recent japanese murderer. I don’t exactly see much deterrence in the death penalty.
T minus 55 minutes, and counting…
Executions, I think, lead us to think of our own mortality. I might have 55 years instead of 55 minutes, but we all have to take the dirt nap eventually.
I just read that he ate mint chocolate chip ice cream as his last meal. For some reason, that’s the first part of this whole thing that has made me uncomfortable. I mean, it’s just ice cream but you just don’t think of a horrific, vile person wanting mint chocolate chip ice cream.
Mars Horizon
Sorry for the lateness of my reply…strictly a M-F poster:
Lon H. was the FBI sharpshooter who shot Randy Weavers wife in the Ruby Ridge deal.
I read that the San Francisco court of appeals ruled that his actions “exceeded the limits of immunity given to federal agents.” – Granted, this particular quote comes from the Boston Metro…
And that mint chocolate chip ice cream will not be digested when his corpse is put into the oven.
And now he is dead. And I don’t feel any better. I was not affected by the bombing. I lost no loved ones. I understand the pain he caused. Perhaps his death will give some comfort to his victims who lived and the survivors of his victims who died.
I’ve said that I used to be in favour of capital punishment, and that over the years I have become ambivalent and that I lean toward opposing it. Clearly, if anyone deserved to be executed it was McVeigh. Some people “need killing”.
But I can’t help feeling some shame at living in a country that executes people.
Several things about the execution bother me:
1)The posters who refer to McVeigh as a "person. Why the quotation marks? McVeigh was a human being, a flawed man who did something inexplicably evil. He wasn’t a slavering monster; he was an intelligent, but deranged, man whose right-wing fantasies led him to kill innocents. Dehuman-
izing McVeigh hides the truth that the human soul contains the seeds of good and evil; part of what makes this so sad is that, in other circumstances, McVeigh could have been a productive citizen.
2)I am sick to the teeth of the trite and brainless word “closure,” as if grief and loss could be shut off like a valve when McVeigh died. McVeigh’s execution will not bring any closure to the victims’ families. The loss of a loved one goes on forever, no matter how long the intervening span of years. This act of vengeance will not heal hearts that have been broken.
-
Even if you believe that state-sponsored executions are morally right, no decent person can take joy in McVeigh’s death. Perhaps it was necessary, but the execution should be performed with sadness that a man could act so brutally against so many innocent people.
-
I am ashamed of my nation that we kill criminals, just like China, Iraq, and North Korea.
So from one side of your mouth you say that McVeigh wasn’t a monster, and from the other you imply that the leaders and populace of those countries are.
OK, gotcha. :rolleyes:
And just where do you get that? The leaders of those countries aren’t monsters, but they’re not exactly people I want our nation to imitate. The people, I’m sure, are very nice, but, in case you didn’t know, those countries are all dictatorships and the people have no voice in their governments’ policies. We do.
I think this issue has many people divided on their beliefs. I, well…I thought, don’t believe in capital punishment as a rule. Living in a country that does not implement capital punishment gives me the luxury of making these decisions, perhaps without the thought that may be just. However, I can’t help but think that the world is now just a little bit better off with Tim McVeigh no longer alive. (It’s now approx 90 min after the execution) He killed 168 people, injured hundreds more, and wounded millions through his actions. I wasn’t totally sure how I felt about the whole issue until I read a new “tidbit” on my elevator ride up to the office a few nimutes ago. Apparently, and this may not be true, one of his wishes was to HAVE HIS ASHES SCATTERED NEAR THE OKLAHOMA MEMORIAL ! Upon hearing this, I found myself so disgusted words almost fail me. This man has no soul, emotion, or respect for humanity. Sadly, I think he has single handedly changed my views on capital punishment!
Flipping round the dial on the way in to work today, the morning people on our “bubble-gum” station were playing an interview with (I assume) a doctor, who was describing the chemicals in a lethal injection, and their effects. Behind this, and subsequent other related soundbites regarding the execution, the deejays were playing AC/DC’s “Highway to Hell”. You could tell it was pre-recorded because of how certain sound-bites lined up with the lyrics. IMHO, this was the most tasteless, crass, juvenile display I’ve been a witness to.
Aside from this, I think the media has (for once) been quite restrained in their coverage. It was obvious that the people on GMA this morning were going to great pains to be carefully non-emotional in their reporting. Just wish they could TRY doing that when covering all things political.
[sub]And now, on to the great debate portion of our post…[/sub]
Yes, executions are disturbing. But the murder of an innocent is even more so.
I attended a forum on the death penalty several years ago. I was (am) in favor of it, the person I went with was against it. After it was over, we both agreed that the side favoring the death penalty was much more clear, concise and persuasive with their arguements. The most compelling of these was this: “The state has taken away it’s citizen’s right to revenge, therefore the state must take the responsibility for seeing revenge is dealt.”
I don’t see a problem with that. “Justice” is just another term for revenge. Human nature has not changed so much that we are beyond the need for paying back when an innocent life is taken. But this impulse, in these “modern” times, cannot be left up to individuals to mete out. The state (meaning the government) has taken away the individual’s right to revenge, but humanity’s need for revenge is still there. Those of us in favor of this might try to wrap flimsy excuses around it, but that is mostly to keep deluding both sides from facing the truth of what the arguement is about.
Debating the “humanity” of the offenders is a moot issue. So is debating the “humanity” of our judicial sytem. Everybody involved is human: perpetrator, victim, judge, jury, executioner, random bystander. And that is the POINT. Part of humanity is figuring out the best way to live with each other. This is especially important in light of the fact that some of us are homicidal, others are insane, and our biggest problem is that we don’t know who they are until they do something. At that point all the arguements about deterrence, rehabilitation, the cost of lifetime incarceration get thrown to the side. Because SOMEbody demands revenge.
Civilization has created a system for determining guilt and deciding, and meteing out, punishment. Yet BECAUSE civilization is made up of humans, it is, by definition, an imperfect system. The debate over state control of revenge comes down to one side stating that state-run killing is wrong, and the other side demanding justice. We will not, in the forseeable future swing completely one way or the other. But we will continue to debate where on the spectrum our society should fall.
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Tygr *
**
…the side favoring the death penalty was much more clear, concise and persuasive with their arguements. The most compelling of these was this: “The state has taken away it’s citizen’s right to revenge, therefore the state must take the responsibility for seeing revenge is dealt.”*
It’s not a given that human beings have a right to revenge. In the USA, revenge is certainly not provided for by law. The word “revenge” does not even appear in the Constitution. But if you believe that among life, liberty and the purfuit of happieneff, that revenge is one of those “inalienable rights” Jefferson was talking about, then yes, the state has taken away a citizen’s supposed “right” to revenge. What would you propose, a separate legal status for revenge killings vs. random acts of violence? BTW, McVeigh cites revenge as one of his primary motives for the OKC bombing.
Kudos to you for calling a spade a spade, but
-
Again, Where is it written that we have a right to revenge? and
-
By this logic, why not ground all our laws in humanity’s basest impulses? Yes, society demands revenge against McVeigh, but it also demands to see Britney Spears naked. Maybe she and Christina Aguilera should be legally compelled to do a girl-on-girl shoot for Penthouse. After all, the government has taken away our right to tie them up and physically molest them, so it must take responsibility for seeing that our hot loads get shot all over their faces one way or another, right?
Yes, there is still lots of debate to be had, but countries are abolishing the death penalty at the rate of one or two a year. We may see a time very soon where abolition in the US is not such a far-fetched proposition.
I am against the state killing it’s citizens.
But the strongest arguement against killing this particular beast, I believe, is that he wanted to be executed. I believe that by killing him they have shortened his suffering. In this case, I believe, his suffering should have been prolonged. He should have had to suffer through at least as many years in prison as the average carjacker.
If we recognize suicide by cop, why not suicide by state?
And as for the media, I seem to recall that they don’t publish the names and details of subway suicides because it only encourages them. How then, do they justify what goes on with T McV or the school shooters? Why is no connection made in these instances?
You know what really breaks my heart, we’ll all remember this beasts names for years to come, but we aren’t familiar with the victims names, I know they are recorded that’s not my point.
You know, I had a long rambling reply to this ready to go then I deleted it. I just came to the realisation that no matter what I say, I cannot get anti-capital punishment people such as yourself to see my view, and likewise. I am just not that good of a “debater”. Actually, I’m pretty shitty 
.
So, suffice to say I do have ethics and strong beliefs. I strongly believe he should die 168 times over. That can’t happen though so everyone will have to settle on once. Its over and done.
To each their own.
Look, I hate that I even think this, but somebody who kills one person probably has some personal reason.
Killing 168 people, at once, especially when it isn’t a war or whatever, is completely and utterly callous and evil.
I didn’t know that Tim McVeigh would be executed today, but after listening to various news stations and interviews I’m now feeling a heavy sadness in my heart.
I’ve seen real hate and cruelness in people’s hearts today. Most disturbing are those individuals who craved and wanted to see another person suffer and feel McVeigh didn’t suffer enough. I wondered how much torture and suffering of another would be “enough” for them and how much pleasure would they derive from it.
What now made them better than the one they hate so much?
Some of these people had their child or spouse killed by him. They would still have been alive today if it wasn’t for him. I probably would have wanted to see him suffer too. Its his fault, not theirs. He is the cause of it.
My .02
Brain cancer killed my 19 month old grandson. Is their pain more than mine? Just because I can’t put a name on the source doesn’t make it different.
No, but I’ll bet you sure as hell wish Cancer never touched your family though. You had no choice. This happened from his deliberate action.
Condolences to you. Cancer has touched my family too.