Lets all pray for his soul. 
He gave her 10$… told her to put 5$ worth of gas into a Ford EXPEDITION…
I kept waiting for the story to tell us they drove off, but had to stop at the next gas pump to fill up on gas again…!
I was also thinking something along the lines of “what a lousy shot!”
This poor girl; suffers a stroke as an infant, grows up walking with a limp and half-blind, and now has gotten shot multiple times by her mother’s very poor choice of boyfriend (yes, ex-boyfriend, and there’s nothing in the news story to say that any of this was foreseeable, and I assume it was the mother that broke up with him but still…) That girl will need lots and lots of therapy!
And yet there are stiff arguments against the death penalty. It boggles.
I had a whole paragraph of vitriol and whatnot, but all I think it should boil down to is, one bullet, one unmarked hole, goodbye shithead. Spend the money we WOULD have spent housing, clothing and feeding this fuck, and help the victims.
Well, yeah, some of us believe that murder is murder, period. Yes, even if the perp ain’t worth shit, murder (to be distinguished from killing in self-defense/preservation of innocent lives) is still murder. And some of us just can’t live with that.
So no, continued stiff arguments against the dealth penalty don’t boggle me. Not at all.
Prison–and all of its attendant ugliness–for life, with *no * parole? Yep, absopositively. (And I’ll admit that my motives aren’t entirely altruistic–I want him to suffer until his dying day. Maybe that makes me a bad person. I can live with that, 'cause I didn’t try to murder an innocent child.) But what, for me, realistically amounts to one murder for another (mind you, as far as I know, the child is still alive, but just in case)? Please, not in my name.
Don’t get me wrong. I understand exactly how you feel, as do, I reckon, many other opponents of the death penalty. People who do these things are several orders of magnitude lower than scum (actually, there is no comparison), and the world would be a better place if they weren’t around–or hadn’t even been born. But what good would come of us being just like them? Well, okay, not *just * like them, but I think you get the idea.
Except there are clear differences both legal and moral, between the state protecting its’ law abiding citizenry from a homicidal maniac and the acts of the aforementioned maniac.
When you have someone THAT disconnected from humanity that they not only shoot their significant other, but her child as well, that speaks of an ill that cannot be cured except by death. Some people are just socially damaged beyond repair, and while it’s a romatic notion to believe in life for its’ own sake, keeping the worthless shitwad alive in a box seems to be at odds with the truth of nature.
He tried to kill a disabled child because he was pissed off at his girlfriend. He is a four (now) five time felon. He deserves nothing less than death. I would prefer a he be thrown wide-eyed into a tree barker but would settle for the hot shot.
…with cable tv, internet access, 3 squares a day and a free fucking education. Granted his freedom is restricted but someone as evil as him doesn’t deserve even half of what my tax dollars are giving him every day that he remains alive.
no internet access in MI prisons (most of the staff don’t have it either), only education available in MI prisons are GED, some limited vocational stuff (usually shit that allows the prison to run, like janitorial vocational stuff). no cable that I noticed, shared tv w/200 of your closest friends, other than that if you can personally afford a tv (blackand white), only what’s locally available, when power is on. meals, yea, ever eaten prison food? and, of course, there’s the lack of privacy, lack of freedom, lack of contact w/loved ones, lack of choices. anyone who thinks prison is a cake walk has limited experiences with them.
all of your mail is read by others, censored. only contact w/loved ones is limited visits (where they’re subject to bodysearches), and collect phone calls. nothing in the world to do and all the time to do it in.
I’ll grant you that there are indeed differences in motive–though that’s not even always entirely true; the desire for revenge (understandable), I think, also plays a role–but there’s something about this kind of killing that just doesn’t sit well with me.
And, really, if the goal is to protect law abiding citizens from homicidal maniacs, well…can’t prisons be effective towards that end? Yeah, I know–murderers (of the cold-blooded variety; yes, I believe that there are different gradations of murder) don’t always get “till your dying day” sentences, and I’m not happy with that,* but restructuring sentencing guidelines so that more of these sentences would, where appropriate, be meted out is more palatable to me than unnecessarily shedding blood.
And my opposition to capital punishment is not based so much on a “romantic” notion of life for life’s sake (though, yeah, I do believe that) as it is on the realization that, try as I may, I simply can’t come up with one good answer to the question “What, in the absence of defense of my own life or some other extraordinarily extenuating circumstance, gives *me * the right to decide that someone should die?”
And I believe that this is why I’ll always stand where I stand, irrespective of how much I despise murderers.
*I’m a true-blue liberal who believes that things are not always black-and-white, and I’m not a fan of most zero-tolerance policies (because the human experience isn’t always zero-tolerance), but commit a murder because you “didn’t want to be a punk” and therefore couldn’t walk away from an argument, or because you don’t like someone’s race/ethnicity/religion/sex/sexual orientation/blah-blah-blah, or because you coveted some possession of theirs, or because your “holy” book told you to, or some other bullshit excuse that doesn’t involve imminent danger to yourself or others? Then you need to be removed from civilized society, never to re-enter same. Never. No ifs, ands, or buts.
Okay, even if what you say is true (and I’d like to think that what **wring ** reports is more the norm than the exception), I gotta tell ya, there ain’t nothing like freedom!
Imagine that a lifer gets cable TV (which I don’t have because (a) I don’t watch enough TV to justify the expense, (b) I do okay pay-wise, but not enough to waste money on something that I wouldn’t use), internet access, 3 squares a day, and a free education (I should be so lucky–mine’s gonna cost me in excess of $100K), well…then what? I mean, what’s he going to be able to do with those things if, bottom line, he can’t go out to a movie on a Saturday night and then hit the bars to try to get laid? Or if he can’t travel, forget to other countries, but even the next county over? Hell, if he can’t even move more than a five-foot radius without someone’s permission or someone watching his every move? I mean, he can’t do shit (hell, he might not even be able to shit in privacy!), even if he *is * getting all of those things you mention.
But you know what? I can, even if I were too poor for cable TV, internet service, three meals a day, and an education. And so can you, right?
So, yeah, you might *think * that they have it “good,” but you and I both know that they don’t have shit. Not for-real, for-real. And that is just as it ought to be.
Sure they can, but think about this, if we took the resources we used, dollar for dollar, to keep people like this alive for life and redirected those to truly altruistic ends, (this concept applies to all pork barrel projects and similar BS expenses) we could go a greater length to actually ending suffering. If the average cost per year to house one DR inmate is, let’s say $50,000, we slip the killer the needle for, say, $1000, that year alone, there’s an extra $49,000. Granted, that’s WAAAY too simplistic an example, given the intracices of governmental accounting, but still, what about it? I think in your last sentence you hit upon the most critical point in the argument; palatability. Killing someone is a difficult thing to do, but sometimes it needs done. It’s a hard and dirty business but sometimes there is no other choice, and we have to have the stomach to deal with it.
That’s the thing, YOU don’t decide, the law and a jury do. If you’re on a jury, vote as you see fit, and of course, you’re free to oppose the death penalty, but I will tell you this; the answer to your question will come to you clearly if you ever have to identify the remains of a loved one that has been murdered for their, money, things, race, sex, etc. Frankly, as unpleasant as it is, I believe killing the murderer is in balance.
Oh, sure, we could dispatch a murderer for your hypothetical $1,000, but only if we ignored the murderer’s constitutional rights to a trial and appeals and the attorney(s) that would be required for these processes.
I like your idea about using our resources for altruistic ends, and in that spirit, you know where I’d really like a great deal of those resources to go? Towards adequate, consistent mental health treatment for those who need it, because it seems clear to me that many/most/all(?) murderers have serious mental health issues going on. (IANAPsychologist/Psychiatrist/Therapist, but since I don’t believe in literally having a good/evil soul or heart, this seems to me to be the most logical call.) Maybe if that happened, we wouldn’t have so many murderers in our midst to begin with. Actually, I’m willing to wager that we wouldn’t.
We also need to create a more just society, one that isn’t riddled with such stark inequality and all of those other things that sometimes play a role in criminal activity. That won’t take only money, though. It’ll also take will, and this country, I think, simply doesn’t have it–not for something like creating a more equitable society.
Well, by “me,” I meant also “in my name,” but I get the point you’re making.
And please check your zipper, sir–your canard is showing. While you’re right that I would feel unspeakable rage at the piece of shit who puts me in the position of having to ID the remains of a loved one that he’s taken from me, and while, in that moment, I’d want to kill him, you can’t possibly know how this would ultimately translate for me. I haven’t been there (and I hope I never am)–though a 16-year-old cousin (whom I didn’t know well) was murdered in the Bronx this past summer–but I believe that, in the end, my core convictions would hold me in stead, and that I’d realize the utter futility of taking a life out of revenge. Now, the day that doing so brings my loved one back to me? In a New York minute, but that’s not possible, so what I have to gain by shedding blood upon blood?
And yes, my family and friends know (or they ought to know) that, Og forbid I should ever become a victim of murder, the death penalty would be the last thing that I would want for the killer. A lifetime of surrendered freedom, torment and indescribable suffering? Sure, have at it, but not death. Not in my name, ‘cause once I go, I ain’t comin’ back.
Here’s the scenario; You’re living in an aparment building, there’s an argument between a man and woman raging two apartments over. Police are called by you and two other people in the building. As they arrive, several shots ring out, followed by screaming. You and several other residents in the building duck for cover as the officers rush up the stairs. Just as the officer in the lead rounds the corner, an apartment door opens and a woman, bloody and sobbing steps carefully out of the barely opened door, standing just outside of the frame. The officer says “what’s going on, are you ok?” Through lurching sobs, the woman manages to tell the officer that “He. Shot. My. Sister. And. Her. Baby.” Then you (as the officer) see the barrel of a gun, brushed metal finish, it’s an automatic, probably a 9mm, wedged into the back of her neck “Fuck” runs through your mind “don’t shoot this woman, please”. You have radioed for backup, SWAT and medics, other officers are already surrounding the building and taking posts on the perimeter of the apartment.
You try and talk this guy out of it, but he’s just not having it, not at all. He’s not listening, so you start to back off and wait for HBT. Then the woman, her sobbing slowing, feels the gun barrel thud against the back of her head and before you can scream “DON’T” the gun barks to life… BANG … a circle of fire surrounds the woman’s head as the bullet passes through her left eye… BANG… more fire, the smell of cordite and burnt hair fill up the hallway, this time, the bullet expands and leaves the forehead areawith an exit would roughly the size of a donut hole. Blood drips from the corners of her mouth, her eyes roll up into her head, and this woman, who was counting on you to save her, falls down like a wet sack of cement, dies right there in the hallway.
You can’t rush in, you don’t know who’s still alive in there, you can’t wait, because if there IS anyone alive, you need to save them. You are given the order to go in. You kick the door open, stepping over the woman in the hallway to do it, the door flies open, you scream “POLICE, FREEZE, DON’T YOU MOVE” and you find the gunman on the couch with his hands in the air, looking around you see one woman and two children under six, all with one shot to the head, and the only person left alive in that apartment, the killer says to you, in a calm, even, sober voice “that fuckin’ bitch got what she had comin’ to her”.
You encourage the suspect to acquiesce to your submission techniques, and begin to secure him to take him into custody.
He continues to admit that he did it, all the way through his trial, expressing no remorse.
Is it your contention that this person who killed not only two women, but two children, should simply rot in jail at the expense of the state until every possible appeal is worn out, when three police officers and a civilian witness saw him kill at least one person in cold blood, and he admitted to killing the rest?
Or should someone like this take the express lane to the death chamber? Personally, the sooner he was dead the better I’d like it. Mental health be damned, this man would need to die.
Good mental health care would be a start, and sure, many murderers are nuttier than squirrel turds, but as for your assertion that people can’t simply be evil, well, I don’t assume to know your background, but in mine, 17 years on the street tells me there are indeed people who are simply evil for its’ own sake. These are not licking-the-walls-and-talking-to-your-boots nutters, these are people who are around you every day, who keep their evil inside because they like the thoughts and feelings that come with it. Sure, one could argue that evil is simply mental illness manifesting itself, but some of the things I’ve seen, man, if that’s truly mental illness, and not evil, perhaps both things need a new definition.
We agree there. Society doesn’t have the will for a lot of things though.
Well, by “me,” I meant also “in my name,” but I get the point you’re making.
Well, you seem to have a good hold on your convictions, and that’s great for you, and you’re right, I can’t know how you would ultimately react, but once something so violent and senseless touches you, it changes you, and makes you see the things that I’m talking about. There is a kind of balance in killing the killer. and I’m not talking about eye for an eye, I’m talking about justice and yes, revenge for the name of the dead, and protection of the living from someone who cannot contain their need to kill. It would be better for the state to kill one man, than it would be for that man to kill two citizens.
Yes. No chance for parole, ever. Even when he’s 80 years old, decrepit, and “not a danger” to anyone else, yes.
No.
Well, since I don’t believe in the concepts of souls, or devils, or gods, I don’t know how else to define evil, other than just another manifestation of something that goes horribly, horribly wrong in someone’s brain. If that’s not mental illness, then what else is there?
And though I’m not a mental health professional, I’ve been around enough to realize that mental illness isn’t limited to manifestations of the licking-the-walls-and-talking-to-your-boots variety. There *is * a spectrum, right?
Well, I don’t know. I’m a survivor of domestic childhood abuse, and while that certainly doesn’t rise to the level of murder, it sure as hell wasn’t a crystal stairway, either. Not knowing when your father will *think * you’ve looked at him “wrong,” and threaten to kill you in your sleep? Good times. Being whipped with the sheathed brakeline from a ten-speed bicylcle? Joy and rapture. So, yeah, I’ve been touched by senseless terror and violence in my life.
But my point remains. If the offender can be removed from society–forever and ever and ever–and if killing him outside of the heat of the moment of his crime is going to result only in his death (victims’ families often believe that this will bring them closure, but I’m not sure that it always–or even mostly–works like that), then yeah, we might save a few bucks (and I’m not sure about the current cost-benefit analysis of keeping a murderer locked up for life vs. trial, appeals, and eventual execution–and you’d better hope to God that you have the right person), but haven’t we lost *something * by acting just as brutally (with forethought, at that!) as he did?
I want to be better–to *try * to be better–than the murderer, not emulate him.
I know that we’ll never agree about this, but I’ll tell you something: I used to think that proponents of the death penalty were all raving, blood-thirsty, conservative lunatics, and although I still believe it be a most barbaric practice that adds to what some wouuld call this country’s well-earned charnel house reputation, I haven’t gotten that sense about you in the course of this discussion. FWIW, and all that. Just as, I trust, you don’t think that all opponents of the D.P. are knee-jerk liberal pansies (and I don’t even know if you’re conservative or liberal) who’d sooner kiss a murderer’s boo-boos than dispense justice.
I’m very thankful that I’ve never had to face that situation, and hope that I never do. But a friend of my mom wasn’t so lucky. Her son, who had problems with substance abuse, had been thrown out of his apartment and was living in Golden Gate Park in San Francisco. One night, while he was in his sleeping bag, someone came up and beat him to death with a baseball bat. For absolutely no reason, except (apparently) that he was homeless, and presumably no one would care if he died. His mother was absolutely devastated, of course, not to mention wracked with guilt: she’d refused to let him move in with her, because she was tired of enabling his various addictions. Despite this, she remains ardently and actively opposed to the death penalty.
My point is, most of us who are opposed to the death penalty are opposed out of deeply held moral convictions, and it is slightly insulting to suggest that we would allow anger and grief to over-ride our basic sense of right and wrong.
Alexis is still in critical condition..
Sailboat
Point. Still, I think, just as good can exist in the absence of a soul, or gods or devils, that because of the necessity of balance, evil must therefore exist. It may be defineable by the standards of mental health practitioners, just as it is by the practitioners of a particular faith, but evil, it seems to me is much like pornography, I can’t give you a definition of what it IS, but I know it when I see it.
No, that’s true, there are all manners and degrees of mental illness, but the person who committed the crime in the OP, slips right beyond the boot talker and right into that openly defined ‘evil’ I mentioned before.
Oh I’ve been there. Not, it seems to the degree you have, but I’ve been there. It seems to me a very large cross-section of people over a certain age have been visited by the spectre of childhood abuse, especially as narrowly as we define it today.
Well sure, it would be better if we could remove the offender from society forever, but jail is no longer a thing to be feared. Either we keep the death penalty, and express people like this to the head of the line, or we make prison so damned frightening, so horrible, so much like punishment (penal system vs. correction, which is little incentive at all) that a rational person would want to avoid it at all costs. This, IMO would bring the truly nutso to the surface sooner, that we might help them, and further, a primitive prison environment of minimal size, infrastructure and overall footprint would be a serious reduction in the costs to you and me.
Thank you, and no, I don’t see all D.P. opponents as knee-jerk pansies, though I will admit that yours is one of the more reasoned discourses I’ve had on the subject, and truly, I appreciate it. FWIW, I’m a law and order liberal. I think social issues are the business of the states and the people, and that mostly the gov’t has no business telling any one person how to live their lives. On the other hand, I think that laws that protect people from other people, and the punishments issued based on those laws, especially in this case, ought be as harsh as is humanly possible, and I submit that on some level, the constitutionality of a punishment does not outweigh the rights of an individual.
Well, it’s equally insulting to suggest that proponents of the death penalty have a lesser sense of right and wrong. Of course, I never intended to insult, and I’m reasonably sure you don’t, but IMO, the case in the OP, as well as the case in your post, there is a direct line from the commission of those crimes to the bed and needle, at least for me. The more senseless the crime, the harsher punishment ought to be. To me, it’s a matter of incentive. If you stop for a second and think ‘if I kill this dude, and they find me, I’ll be killed too’ that may stop some, further, if society made prison a place to be afraid of instead of a modern criminal convention, this too would be incentive not to commit the crime you’re tihnking of committing.
This incentive would not stop all, or even most crimes, but if it lets one little girl and her mother live in relative peace, isn’t that worth it?