Okay I did and I understand your position now. Thank you.
Doesn’t work that way. What’s the compelling reason for parole? Not this:
Plan more murders.
A sociopath in a constant state of future shock. What could possibly go wrong?
Dude, you win the thread.
Look, if you need someone to room with and share the rent, put a flyer on your nearby college bulletin board.
Parole him aaand…give him his own reality show! Yeah, that’s the ticket! Uh, let’s call it, um, What’s Up Chuck? Not only would he have an ankle bracelet, but he’d be constantly monitored by millions of people! Yeah! That’s it!
Still looks like he can pull a trigger to me. Or poison someone’s food, or run them over, or electrocute them, or stab them, or throw a brick off a highway bridge, or set a house on fire, or feed their babies to dingos…
While I doubt anybody believes Manson could or should fit into society and while he’s done nothing to imply he is or could be rehabilitated, there was a very heated debate on Leslie Van Houten. I once believed she should die in prison, but will admit I changed my mind after reading John Waters’ book in which she’s mentioned.
It’s not that I think “well, she was a messed up kid then”- she was, but she was a messed up kid who participated in horrible murders the most screwed up kid in the world would have known were morally and socially and every-other-ly wrong, BUT, by the laws of California she is entitled to consideration for parole. For the last forty years she has been a model inmate, she has availed herself of literally every available educational and betterment opportunity, she has volunteered for decades with tutoring illiterate and HIV+ and other physically infirm inmates, she trains guide dogs for the blind, and literally could not possibly have made more satisfactory progress or done more for consideration of the parole board, yet she’s turned down each time with insufficient or ridiculous explanations.
I would have no problem with her dying in prison if that was the law; I would have had no problem had she been executed before her sentence was commuted, BUT, if the law says she’s entitled to an actual parole hearing and not just a “too infamous a case” rubber stamp denial, she should have been released by now.
To be exact, there was a moratorium on the death penalty throughout the USA, not just California.
Y’all are assuming that Manson would behave himself so as not to jeopardize his parole, if it’s granted. Just because the parole board decides you’re ready to re-join society doesn’t mean you go right to your cell to get your stuff together, then leave on the next train. There is a lag between the time that parole is granted and the time you leave, and if you break the rules, your parole can be rescinded. Manson presumably knows that and would probably do whatever he could to lose his parole, so it’s probably a moot question anyway.
Yeah, all that bitching that went up about how Ghaddaffi bought it was ridiculous. “A civilized society requires justice, we’re better than that, we need to put him on trial”
Fuck that noise.
He’s too dangerous to be kept alive, anyone near him is in danger of being shot by a supporter wanting revenge to seeking to rescue him and I value the life of every single person in Libya over Mo’s. 'Sides, dying with a bayonet in your ass is the legacy he deserves.
Even if we were to grant, for the sake of argument, that he’s completely reformed and would now be a model citizen, it would still be no mercy to release him. He’s got no job, no savings, no retirement plan, and probably no close family, and at 77, he’s not likely to get any of that any time soon. What would he do with the rest of his life, at his age, if he were released?
I disagree. I think a better message would be that we can forgive and will always hold out the hope that individuals will reform. That might be a useful lesson in helping people with the difficult process of letting go of hate. (And releasing felons after long periods of incarceration is hardly a “do-over”.) So yeah, in theory I believe Manson has every right to parole if he reformed. Better a society that clings to hope and mercy rather than to retribution IMO.
Fuck him. Never.
He could try furthering his music career.
Good lord.
After what he thought of the White Album, what do you suppose he would do with Dark Side of the Moon?
In other threads, I’ve expressed my support for the death penalty and an opposition to a LWOP sentence. I believe that over the course of 40, 50, or even 60 years a person can change and be able to re-enter society.
However, in Manson’s case it hasn’t happened. I agree that he should be given a full, fair, and impartial hearing to determine these facts, but it still remains that he is unrepentant, crazier than hell, violent, has no means of support, and a significant non-zero probability of re-offending. That makes him an unsuitable candidate for parole under the most liberal viewing.
Leslie Van Houten, OTOH, I might agree that she has shown enough to be a productive member of society.
I do not believe in ‘evil’ in a person - it is an outmoded religious concept. I do however believe that someone can be permanently damaged in such a way that they are a danger to society. Manson is one of these damaged people. Leslie Van Houten seems not to be one. I can see paroling her, but he needs to remain in custody.
Besides - can you see the uproar around finding him a halfway position, talk about ‘not in my backyard’ !
If he is entitled to parole then yes.
I’m not sure what you mean by that. Nobody is “entitled” to parole. It is an absolutely discretionary function of the parole board.
And even then, it’s not an objective decision. Each board member could look at the same facts and decide differently on his eligibility. There’s really no way to objectively say that Manson or any other inmate is “entitled” to parole.
Ha! Thread won 