Giffords shooter gets seven consecutive life terms + 140 years.

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by MrPraline (21331 posts) -
bye Good riddance. Also happy the judge took into account the possibility of him turning 600+ years one day. Not overkill or anything. Not faux justice for the victims. Just a precaution against pesky science, zombies and deals with the dark prince. But seriously, good riddance.
#2 Posted by dave123321 (34484 posts) -
Am content
#3 Posted by WhiteKnight77 (12017 posts) -

I still think that he should have had to go to trial and face a possible death penalty. At least he will rot in jail.

#4 Posted by airshocker (31411 posts) -

Should have put him to death.

#5 Posted by l4dak47 (6838 posts) -

Should have put him to death.

airshocker
What exactly would that achieve other than unneeded revenge?
#6 Posted by sammyjenkis898 (28382 posts) -

Should have put him to death.

airshocker
Nah, let the guy get raped in jail.
#7 Posted by Abbeten (3140 posts) -

and here

we

go

#8 Posted by Bucked20 (6651 posts) -
Good for him
#9 Posted by airshocker (31411 posts) -

What exactly would that achieve other than unneeded revenge? l4dak47

1) Removing a sociopath(possibly a psychopath) from this world.

2) It's the ultimate end of freedom.

3) Punishment.

#10 Posted by l4dak47 (6838 posts) -

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]What exactly would that achieve other than unneeded revenge? airshocker

1) Removing a sociopath(possibly a psychopath) from this world.

2) It's the ultimate end of freedom.

3) Punishment.

We've already removed him from society by essentially giving him life in prison. Life imprisonment is punishment.You're not very free in jail. Anymore is unnecessary.
#11 Posted by airshocker (31411 posts) -

We've already removed him from society by essentially giving him life in prison. Life imprisonment is punishment.You're not very free in jail. Anymore is unnecessary. l4dak47

And I want him removed from the world.

You're free enough in jail. There are people who go on to write books in jail. Get state funded educations. Healthcare for the rest of his life.

It's unnecessary. Put a bullet in the back of his head and be done with it, if we're really concerned about the cost of a pharamceutical cocktail.

#12 Posted by WhiteKnight77 (12017 posts) -

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]What exactly would that achieve other than unneeded revenge? l4dak47

1) Removing a sociopath(possibly a psychopath) from this world.

2) It's the ultimate end of freedom.

3) Punishment.

We've already removed him from society by essentially giving him life in prison. Life imprisonment is punishment.You're not very free in jail. Anymore is unnecessary.

Prisoners get TV, play time, free access to legal libraries, gyms and other things their victims do not get to. One has many freedoms while in prison due to people not wanting to inconvience criminals with supposedly cruel and unusual punishments.

#13 Posted by WhiteKnight77 (12017 posts) -

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]We've already removed him from society by essentially giving him life in prison. Life imprisonment is punishment.You're not very free in jail. Anymore is unnecessary. airshocker

And I want him removed from the world.

You're free enough in jail. There are people who go on to write books in jail. Get state funded educations. Healthcare for the rest of his life.

It's unnecessary. Put a bullet in the back of his head and be done with it, if we're really concerned about the cost of a pharamceutical cocktail.

I agree with the bullet to the back of the head. It worked really well for the Soviets except they had no appeals process. I am willing to at least give someone one appeal within 30 days.

#14 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (7933 posts) -

Should have put him to death.

airshocker
Wasn't he ruled 'mentally incompetent' or something along those lines?
#15 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
I am pleased.
#16 Posted by Capitan_Kid (6642 posts) -

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]We've already removed him from society by essentially giving him life in prison. Life imprisonment is punishment.You're not very free in jail. Anymore is unnecessary. airshocker

And I want him removed from the world.

You're free enough in jail. There are people who go on to write books in jail. Get state funded educations. Healthcare for the rest of his life.

It's unnecessary. Put a bullet in the back of his head and be done with it, if we're really concerned about the cost of a pharamceutical cocktail.

So you advocate unnecessary violence? Theres no need for mindless bloodshed in the 20th century. Let him rot in jail. Why not educate them? The purpose of prison is rehabilitation. We hope that when they come out, they learn right from wrong
#17 Posted by airshocker (31411 posts) -

Wasn't he ruled 'mentally incompetent' or something along those lines? HoolaHoopMan

Don't know. Didn't follow the case much since it was pretty cut and dry.

Unless this guy is going to be locked up in solitary confinement in a super max prison for the rest of his life, the only fitting punishment is death.

#18 Posted by WhiteKnight77 (12017 posts) -

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

Should have put him to death.

HoolaHoopMan

Wasn't he ruled 'mentally incompetent' or something along those lines?

No, he was ruled competent to stand trial, even with a history of mental illness. He knew what he was doing that day.

#19 Posted by Hallenbeck77 (14687 posts) -

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

Should have put him to death.

HoolaHoopMan

Wasn't he ruled 'mentally incompetent' or something along those lines?

His defense tried to have him sought as mentally unfit to stand trial. When it was declared that he was, he took a guilty plea that would guarantee life imprisonment without parole rather than risk standing trial and possibly facing the death penalty.

#20 Posted by airshocker (31411 posts) -

So you advocate unnecessary violence? Theres no need for mindless bloodshed in the 20th century. Let him rot in jail. Why not educate them? The purpose of prison is rehabilitation. We hope that when they come out, they learn right from wrongCapitan_Kid

It being unnecessary is debatable. It being mindless isn't. I already gave my reasons for why he should be put to death. None of it was mindless.

Rehabilitation doesn't work. The recidivism rate is somewhere near 70%, I believe. That shows that it doesn't work. And I doubt any softer forms of punishment will.

#21 Posted by tagyhag (15867 posts) -

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]We've already removed him from society by essentially giving him life in prison. Life imprisonment is punishment.You're not very free in jail. Anymore is unnecessary. airshocker

And I want him removed from the world.

You're free enough in jail. There are people who go on to write books in jail. Get state funded educations. Healthcare for the rest of his life.

It's unnecessary. Put a bullet in the back of his head and be done with it, if we're really concerned about the cost of a pharamceutical cocktail.

What if they gave him 24 hours solitary confinement for the rest of his life?
#22 Posted by airshocker (31411 posts) -

What if they gave him 24 hours solitary confinement for the rest of his life?tagyhag

They wouldn't, which is my point. Solitary confinement is limited. It's considered cruel and unusual punishment for it to be longer than a certain amount of time.

#23 Posted by Bloodseeker23 (8338 posts) -

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]We've already removed him from society by essentially giving him life in prison. Life imprisonment is punishment.You're not very free in jail. Anymore is unnecessary. airshocker

And I want him removed from the world.

You're free enough in jail. There are people who go on to write books in jail. Get state funded educations. Healthcare for the rest of his life.

It's unnecessary. Put a bullet in the back of his head and be done with it, if we're really concerned about the cost of a pharamceutical cocktail.

HE should be shot. He is wasting tax money rotting in jail doin nuthin
#24 Posted by KiIIyou (27157 posts) -
Then what happens?
#25 Posted by LJS9502_basic (153510 posts) -
Justice was served then....
#26 Posted by dave123321 (34484 posts) -

and here

we

go

Abbeten
indeed OT worries me
#27 Posted by l4dak47 (6838 posts) -

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]We've already removed him from society by essentially giving him life in prison. Life imprisonment is punishment.You're not very free in jail. Anymore is unnecessary. airshocker

And I want him removed from the world.

You're free enough in jail. There are people who go on to write books in jail. Get state funded educations. Healthcare for the rest of his life.

It's unnecessary. Put a bullet in the back of his head and be done with it, if we're really concerned about the cost of a pharamceutical cocktail.

I really don't give that much of a sh*t about this guy. I just want to be consistent on the death penalty issue. And that means no one gets killed by the state regardless of how overwhelming the evidence are or how horrific their crimes are.
#28 Posted by l4dak47 (6838 posts) -

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]We've already removed him from society by essentially giving him life in prison. Life imprisonment is punishment.You're not very free in jail. Anymore is unnecessary. WhiteKnight77

And I want him removed from the world.

You're free enough in jail. There are people who go on to write books in jail. Get state funded educations. Healthcare for the rest of his life.

It's unnecessary. Put a bullet in the back of his head and be done with it, if we're really concerned about the cost of a pharamceutical cocktail.

I agree with the bullet to the back of the head. It worked really well for the Soviets except they had no appeals process. I am willing to at least give someone one appeal within 30 days.

You're willing to let potentially innocent people die for your misguided notion of justice?
#29 Posted by l4dak47 (6838 posts) -

[QUOTE="tagyhag"]What if they gave him 24 hours solitary confinement for the rest of his life?airshocker

They wouldn't, which is my point. Solitary confinement is limited. It's considered cruel and unusual punishment for it to be longer than a certain amount of time.

But it infringes the most on his freedoms and I thought you were in support of that?
#30 Posted by WhiteKnight77 (12017 posts) -

[QUOTE="tagyhag"]What if they gave him 24 hours solitary confinement for the rest of his life?airshocker

They wouldn't, which is my point. Solitary confinement is limited. It's considered cruel and unusual punishment for it to be longer than a certain amount of time.

Exactly and the reason why those who do have to go to solitary have one hour a day in the exercise yard, even if by themselves.

#31 Posted by tagyhag (15867 posts) -

[QUOTE="tagyhag"]What if they gave him 24 hours solitary confinement for the rest of his life?airshocker

They wouldn't, which is my point. Solitary confinement is limited. It's considered cruel and unusual punishment for it to be longer than a certain amount of time.

I know, but it's a hypothetical question.
#32 Posted by WhiteKnight77 (12017 posts) -

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

[QUOTE="tagyhag"]What if they gave him 24 hours solitary confinement for the rest of his life?tagyhag

They wouldn't, which is my point. Solitary confinement is limited. It's considered cruel and unusual punishment for it to be longer than a certain amount of time.

I know, but it's a hypothetical question.

Even if in solitary confinement, he would still have access to the previously mentioned amenities, even if not with a group of other prisoners. The touchy feely people want prison to give criminals things that victims do not get, especially in the case of murderers.

#33 Posted by Blue-Sky (10348 posts) -

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]What exactly would that achieve other than unneeded revenge? airshocker

1) Removing a sociopath(possibly a psychopath) from this world.

2) It's the ultimate end of freedom.

3) Punishment.

4) save us $40,000 a year in tax dollars

#34 Posted by TrapJak (2933 posts) -

So is this solitary confinement or the usual slammer? If it's the former , then I'm ok with that. But just putting him in jail is too good for him.

#35 Posted by bloodling (5822 posts) -

So you advocate unnecessary violence? Theres no need for mindless bloodshed in the 20th century. Let him rot in jail. Why not educate them? The purpose of prison is rehabilitation. We hope that when they come out, they learn right from wrongCapitan_Kid

Violence? Nobody's talking about torturing him or anything like that. He killed 6 people. To some people, that's worth the death penalty. You might not think that's how we should deal with it, but some people do. Some people can be rehabilitated, some people can't and don't even deserve to be rehabilitated.

#36 Posted by chessmaster1989 (30075 posts) -

You're free enough in jail. There are people who go on to write books in jail. Get state funded educations. Healthcare for the rest of his life.

airshocker

Yup, being stuck in one place, unable to leave for the rest of your life. Sounds like a blast.

#37 Posted by Rhazakna (11022 posts) -
The guy seemed pretty whacked out of his gourd. Was there an attempted insanity plea? From what I saw of the guy's ravings, he\ may be a guy it would apply to.
#38 Posted by airshocker (31411 posts) -

I really don't give that much of a sh*t about this guy. I just want to be consistent on the death penalty issue. And that means no one gets killed by the state regardless of how overwhelming the evidence are or how horrific their crimes are. l4dak47

Some people don't deserve to live. Letting people live after committing terrible crimes cheapens our justice system and our way of life. It sends the message that "Go ahead, do whatever the fvck you want. The worst we'll do is lock you up, feed you three times a day, give you a heated cell, let you have more freedom than that of which you stole from the person you murdered. We'll also educate you if you want it. Let you read works of fiction your victim may never ever read. We won't even force you to do manual labor."

Fvck that sh*t. Letting somebody live after killing another human being isn't punishment. It's a reward.

#39 Posted by airshocker (31411 posts) -

Yup, being stuck in one place, unable to leave for the rest of your life. Sounds like a blast.

chessmaster1989

It's more than some victims get to do.

#40 Posted by airshocker (31411 posts) -

You're willing to let potentially innocent people die for your misguided notion of justice? l4dak47

Not everyone is potentially innocent.

#41 Posted by dave123321 (34484 posts) -

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]You're willing to let potentially innocent people die for your misguided notion of justice? airshocker

Not everyone is potentially innocent.

obvs
#42 Posted by chessmaster1989 (30075 posts) -

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

Yup, being stuck in one place, unable to leave for the rest of your life. Sounds like a blast.

airshocker

It's more than some victims get to do.

So you view the purpose of the death penalty as vengeance?

#43 Posted by airshocker (31411 posts) -

So you view the purpose of the death penalty as vengeance?

chessmaster1989

Punishment. Vengeance. Whatever floats your boat. It serves the same purpose.

#44 Posted by Stesilaus (3673 posts) -

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]I really don't give that much of a sh*t about this guy. I just want to be consistent on the death penalty issue. And that means no one gets killed by the state regardless of how overwhelming the evidence are or how horrific their crimes are. airshocker

Some people don't deserve to live. Letting people live after committing terrible crimes cheapens our justice system and our way of life. It sends the message that "Go ahead, do whatever the fvck you want. The worst we'll do is lock you up, feed you three times a day, give you a heated cell, let you have more freedom than that of which you stole from the person you murdered. We'll also educate you if you want it. Let you read works of fiction your victim may never ever read. We won't even force you to do manual labor."

Fvck that sh*t. Letting somebody live after killing another human being isn't punishment. It's a reward.

So, if US Army Sgt Robert Bales is found guilty and doesn't receive the death sentence, you'll express your disappointment here, won't you?

#45 Posted by coolbeans90 (21305 posts) -

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]You're willing to let potentially innocent people die for your misguided notion of justice? airshocker

Not everyone is potentially innocent.

See, the thing is, unless you have a foolproof mechanism to prevent innocent deaths, which I do not see, it opens the door for that. I really don't have much of a moral opposition to the death penalty in and of itself, but accidental murders are a barrier I can't cross.

#46 Posted by chessmaster1989 (30075 posts) -

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

So you view the purpose of the death penalty as vengeance?

airshocker

Punishment. Vengeance. Whatever floats your boat. It serves the same purpose.

Punishment and vengeance are different.
#47 Posted by hiphops_savior (8101 posts) -

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]What exactly would that achieve other than unneeded revenge? Blue-Sky

1) Removing a sociopath(possibly a psychopath) from this world.

2) It's the ultimate end of freedom.

3) Punishment.

4) save us $40,000 a year in tax dollars

$40,000 a year in tax dollars is worth spending if the alternative is the guy goes free or billions spent on appeals.
#48 Posted by airshocker (31411 posts) -

So, if US Army Sgt Robert Bales is found guilty and doesn't receive the death sentence, you'll express your disappointment here, won't you?

Stesilaus

Absolutely. Though I don't know what this has to do with anything.

#49 Posted by l4dak47 (6838 posts) -

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]You're willing to let potentially innocent people die for your misguided notion of justice? airshocker

Not everyone is potentially innocent.

Never claimed otherwise, however some are and far too many innocents have been executed already in our justice system. And that makes the state guilty of murder.
#50 Posted by l4dak47 (6838 posts) -

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]I really don't give that much of a sh*t about this guy. I just want to be consistent on the death penalty issue. And that means no one gets killed by the state regardless of how overwhelming the evidence are or how horrific their crimes are. airshocker

Some people don't deserve to live. Letting people live after committing terrible crimes cheapens our justice system and our way of life. It sends the message that "Go ahead, do whatever the fvck you want. The worst we'll do is lock you up, feed you three times a day, give you a heated cell, let you have more freedom than that of which you stole from the person you murdered. We'll also educate you if you want it. Let you read works of fiction your victim may never ever read. We won't even force you to do manual labor."

Fvck that sh*t. Letting somebody live after killing another human being isn't punishment. It's a reward.

So, we have different philosophies, okay. W/e, i don't really want to get into that debate, but I will say this; this idea that sever punishment/death penalty is an effective deterrent is wrong.