Got me to thinking. In our society there has been big debates on the death penalty being applied to young people, i.e. a 16 year old commits murder, should he be executed.
But what about the very old. How do people feel about executing the very old? What if Great Grandpa kills the entire family? In Texas, no less! If there are moral problems with executing the very young, are there moral problems with executing the very old?
Here’s another scenario: A man viciously kills people when he is young and escapes punishment. Then, many, many years later he is found, when he is very, very old. How do we punish him? What if that man were Hitler? What would we do if we found out that Hitler has been living in South America all these years. Sure, he’d be 112 years old. But that’s part of the debate: What would/should we do with him?
If the perpetrator is very old, and yet mentally competent to stand trial and understand the charges against him, I can’t see why it would be any different from trying someone, say, 40 or 50 years old.
Personally, I have qualms about the death penalty, although I can see why it would be used in certain extreme situations.
As far as I know, there is no statute of limitations on murder in any state. I would expect that he be tried for the crime in the jurisdiction where it was committed, with the full possible range of sentences available.
Well, Hitler at 112 returning from the dead is a very special case indeed.
He is like gold dust for any public relations guy who know his onions, as the curiosity value of a newly alive Adolf far outweighs the horror which various citizens feel at the crimes he commits.
I do not place Adolf in the same category as Gordon Liddy, as Gordon Liddy’s crimes are less fatal than Hitler’s, according to many good judges, but I see him pursuing a similar career path, with talk shows, lecture tours, book deals, maybe a movie of his life, and finally he is given his own radio show, where he plays Wagner all the time, and in his spare moments he advertises Coca Cola, or Pepsi, whichever he prefers.
Of course, he cannot engage in such activities if he is executed, so the answer is no, Hitler is not offed, under any circumstances whatsoever.
No way he’d resurface-if he were still alive, he’d probably be hiding out in a cave somewhere-he’d know that if he did reveal himself, he’d be tortured to death.
Old Joke: The Aryan Nations sends a delegation down to South America to find Hitler and ask him to come back and be their leader. They find the ancient old man hidden away in the jungle and beg and plead for days. Finally, Hitler gives in and growls “Alright! But this time, no more Mr. Nice Guy!”
Before Hitler died (though accounts by those near him in the bunker are distorted of course), he often expressed regret that he had been too ‘soft’ and to ‘lenient’ as a leader…
It’s scary to think that Hitler, in his own deluded mind, thought he was cutting people too much slack.
Sorry pkbites, it was kinda disrespectful to toss my joke in. I doubt it’s going to be much of a debate though, there are still nazis being caught and prosecuted and there is no statute of limitations on many crimes. Atreyu pretty much nailed the reality of the situation. There was some debate in the Canadian press recently about whether or not these old men in their eighties should be prosecuted, but the anti-prosecution side got no support. There was that interesting case in England recently of the 82 year old woman who turned out to have spied for the Soviets most of her life. The Brits decided not to prosecute, but she only turned over nuclear secrets. Other British spies, such as Kim Philby, gave information to the Soviets that killed hundreds of people, and he rightfully died in exile. Ronnie Biggs, the violent “great train robber” stumbled home to England an ancient old vegetable, desperate for a civilized health care system, and they popped him into custody, ignoring pleas to cut the old celebrity some slack, but it was a violent crime.
The International War Crimes Tribunal, if it was given jurisdiction, has disavowed the death penalty. So the old monster wouldn’t be put up against a wall and shot if tried there.
(But imagine if he was incarcerated at the Hague. You’d have to surround him with an army to keep protestors from seizing the building, and even then that army would be thinking about whether or not to hand him to the mob. Several hundred glory seekers would be trying to kill him to be known as The Man Who Killed Hitler. The governments of a couple of countries (Israel, Russia, Poland, for example) would be thinking about sending special forces to kidnap him. Historians would be trying to pick his brains for historical data before someone got to him. What a mess.)
So how did the debate go to shit? I answered the question of what should be done with Hitler if he were captured. As I mentioned earlier, I have reservations about the use of capital punishment, but I understand its application in extreme cases.
Hitler strikes me as an extreme case. He led his country into one of the worst periods of war in human history, and attempted to wipe out as many Jews and non-Aryans as possible. Execution is the only fitting punishment I can think of for this monster.
On preview I see Dave Stewart’s bit about the International War Crimes Tribunal, and it’s a good point. I strongly suspect though that other countries, particularly Israel, Russia, England, and the U.S. would try very hard to avoid turning Hitler over to them, and have Hitler tried and sentenced within their jurisdiction. (I’m thinking of what happened with Eichmann, here.) England doesn’t have the death penalty though, AFAIK.
The vast majority of seniors are just fine mentally and would be very offended at any attempt to formalize or legislate a justice policy that equates them with juveniles.
Mercy to young offenders is civilized and rational because they usually do not have the wisdom and experience to appreciate the consequences of their acts. Some adults can receive leniency if they are found to be mentally ill enough to not participate in their own defense. It is very offensive to senior citizens to suggest they are no longer adults responsible for their actions. This is the fundamental flaw in this great debate.
In any case, the Russians flushed Hitler’s ashes down a German sewer so there would never be a shrine at his grave.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Al Zheimers * It is very offensive to senior citizens to suggest they are no longer adults responsible for their actions. This is the fundamental flaw in this great debate.
Noc it isn’t because I never said that. One point of the debate is, how is death a suitable “punishment” for someone who is very close to it anyway?
[quote]
*Originally posted by Al Zheimers * In any case, the Russians flushed Hitler’s ashes down a German sewer.
No they didn’t. And I don’t profess to say Hitler is alive.
But if he was, what would the reaction of our society be? Outrage? Insistance that he be killed?
Well Dave, I read it in the newspaper within the last two years. There was a thread or two on the SDMB within the last two years on the whereabouts of Hitler’s remains also, but I’m too lazy to search for them. It’s been pretty much accepted for years that the Russians located and identified Hitler’s burnt corpse but what was done with it wasn’t generally known. As I recall from the newspaper, his jawbone and some other bits, perhaps of his skull, are in an archive in Moscow, but the rest of him was cremated at a military base in Germany just after the war and poured down a storm drain. I remember the article specifying that the Soviets were concerned that the disposal be discrete so there be no chance of a shrine and pilgrimages, human nature being what it is. We digress from the thread but you asked.
Stephen Notley’s take on what should be done with him.
Not that I agree.
Russia doesn’t either. I strongly suspect if they found the old coot at this late date, the CIA and the Mossad would be bending over backwards to kidnap him and get him into the US or Israel to try him publicly and execute him, if for nothing more than to bolster the argument for the death penalty. I think they ought to lock him up and throw away the key, myself. And give the title of “World’s Oldest Human Being” to the next person in line. Only 'cos Adolf wouldn’t qualify for the second half of the title.
I’m not usually a bloodythirsty person. I’m as anti-death penalty and torture as you can get. BUT…for Hitler, the death penalty would be too good for him.
