This kind of freaked me out. I mean, I get that he's insane but can't they just lock him away and throw away the key instead of having a review every year to see if he can be released out into the public again!
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090305/national/crime_bus_beheading (http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090305/national/crime_bus_beheading)
That's such a horrifying story in so many way. I'm glad it didn't have the added horror of sending a sick but nonculpable man to prison.
I don't have the bloodlust to desire that a schizophrenic person be locked away for life for something he had no control over. Simply put, two wrongs don't make a right. Schizophrenia is terrible and frightening for everyone involved, and also treatable. I sympathize with the mother's anger, but I wonder if she'd have such bloodlust if her son had been mauled by a grizzly bear. I don't see this as significantly different.
I think he should be institutionalized for good though. Not prison but permanently hospitalized. Having his release up for debate every year is scary.
Schizophrenia is very treatable, though it's not easy. If he is treated, I don't think it's just to keep a healthy person who is not culpable for any crime incarcerated, whether a prison or a mental institution. I'd agree that he ought to be closely monitored for life. I even agree that the possibility that he be released is scary -- but I think it's an irrational fear, not one based on the real risk.
why do people do what strange voices tell them to do?
I wouldn't.
Quote from: Alyssa M. on March 07, 2009, 02:32:22 PM
I even agree that the possibility that he be released is scary -- but I think it's an irrational fear, not one based on the real risk.
I think it's perfectly rational to be worried about someone who cut off somebody's head and tormented a whole bus full of people. I don't care if he doesn't hear the 'voices' anymore. This man committed a horrific act and shows no remorse or understanding. This is just the kinda behavior that should lock away the man, not put him in the position to be released.
Another unpopular opinion of mine, if you're sensitive you can just skip this post and not read it:
I see humans the same way as I see animals. If a dog starts attacking people, it gets put down, for the health and safety of people. The same way, if a human being starts beheading people, I'm all for the complete removal of that individual from society. If you're going to protect the health and safety of people, it should be done properly.
(Ofcourse, I'm thoroughly against killing people in the first place, but I'd rather have executions of violent criminals than room, board, good health and mental care for them for the duration of their natural lives. Insane or not.)
Quote from: Miniar on March 09, 2009, 03:54:25 PM
Another unpopular opinion of mine, if you're sensitive you can just skip this post and not read it:
I see humans the same way as I see animals. If a dog starts attacking people, it gets put down, for the health and safety of people. The same way, if a human being starts beheading people, I'm all for the complete removal of that individual from society. If you're going to protect the health and safety of people, it should be done properly.
(Ofcourse, I'm thoroughly against killing people in the first place, but I'd rather have executions of violent criminals than room, board, good health and mental care for them for the duration of their natural lives. Insane or not.)
This.
Also, it's much more fiscally responsible to do so.
Quote from: Rebis on March 09, 2009, 03:14:25 PM
why do people do what strange voices tell them to do?
I wouldn't.
Mental illness is not something that one can easily ignore. My half-sister has schizophrenia as does a cousin of mine. The voices seem very real to those people and it's too easy for a sane person to say "just ignore the voices". While not a psychologist or expect, my personal understanding is that the brain is wired somewhat differently for a schizophrenic and understanding is vastly different.
QuoteI think he should be institutionalized for good though. Not prison but permanently hospitalized. Having his release up for debate every year is scary.
My mom was murdered (in front of my half-sister I mention above) in 1992 in Shediac, NB, Canada. The guy got life with possibility of parole after 10 years (2nd Degree murder). It was an additional 10 years before he got released (around the age of 65 or something and ravaged by cancer). While he may be up for release each year, they won't do it unless they know he's cured. Additionally, IIRC, Canada has a requirement that once someone is deemed mentally capable they are sent to prison to finish their sentence. Given that schizophrenia has no known cure, I doubt he'll be released.
Additionally, we still don't know the full extent or cause of this incident. There could be other factors outside of this guy's control as to why it happened. I suspect once he is on medication and understands what he did, his reaction and understanding may be vastly different.
Quote from: Mister on March 09, 2009, 04:03:52 PM
This.
Also, it's much more fiscally responsible to do so.
Its cheaper to keep someone incarcerated than to execute due to all of the legal stuff that needs to be done. There are mandatory appeals.
Odds are the guy will not get out.
All too often people on that sort of medication hate taking it (makes you feel bad I hear), and when taking it, they show no symptoms, and start to rationalize they no longer need the medication, and therefore stop taking it. They don't notice the symptoms and slip back into their old ways.
In terms of being released for his crimes, yes he could be freed, but mentally he is a danger to the community and would be held in an institution for life. He is not considered a criminal, he is considered mentally ill. Someday he may be let out, but under lots of supervision. Letting him out often ends badly though, he relapses, and kills someone and/or is killed by police.
The man is 40 years old, give him 10-20 years in a mental ward and he will be a weak man of 50 or 60. At least.
Quote from: Leslie Ann on March 09, 2009, 05:59:08 PM
Its cheaper to keep someone incarcerated than to execute due to all of the legal stuff that needs to be done. There are mandatory appeals.
yeah, i don't believe that one bit. 50 years of jail is cheaper than a death sentence? c'mon.
Quote from: Mister on March 09, 2009, 06:03:24 PM
yeah, i don't believe that one bit. 50 years of jail is cheaper than a death sentence? c'mon.
Look it up.
Courtrooms, judges and lawyers are not cheap. Imagine the O.J. trial several times over and over again. Then you still have to do the execution, fight off the activist/protesters.
It is generally accepted that life without parole is 1-3million for about 50 years. Depending on court fees, jail, etc.. And you do not have a mandatory appeal. One court proceeding is all it requires.
Pro death penalty sites seem to use estimates on costs, usually a few million is thrown around. Recent stats show that executions run into the tens of millions when all is said and done. New York State recently showed it costs 23million to execute someone (New Jersey announced similar numbers) and if you fail to get a final death penalty, the cost then goes up even more since after all of those legal fees, you still have to incarcerate them for life. Even worse it costs states money just to allow for it, without even using it. New Jersey spent 1/4 billion over 2 decades in order to allow for it, and has not even executed someone during that time. That is a lot of money, to do nothing.
We all die, how are you enacting revenge or payback or what have you by killing them mercifully, make them live out their lives in a hell hole. In the end, they still die in prison. Would you rather spend 50 years looking at walls knowing you will never see daylight or would you rather it just be done with now.
Then there is still one other problem... What if you execute them, and then new evidence shows them innocent? How much is that wrongful death lawsuit going to run? It doesn't deter crime, it costs more, and it is riskier, so why bother? It also brings you down to their level.
If you research it, be sure to look at what side of the fence you are looking at, both sides exaggerate the costs for other side. Look into state fiscal reports, they are far more accurate.
That is certainly the case in the United States -- of course in Canada and other civilized countries there is no death penalty. The cost of administering capital punishment is high because of all the legal hoops that the state needs to jump through. And thank goodness for that -- even with all those hoops, the process is riddled by racism, and we continue to execute innocent people. The insitution itself is degrading regardless. The notion that we execute criminals because it's cheaper or more convenient is sickening to me.
I have no sympathy for the view that humans as morally equivalent to animals. That is the very definition of barbarism.
--
I said it's irrational to fear release because nobody will be banging down the doors of the institutional administrators demanding he be let free, and nobody will want to be the one to let a murderer go free. As Leslie Ann said, the issue is usually medication, and if released (probably many years hence, if ever), it will be under heavy supervision to prevent relapse. He is not getting an easy out.
The outcome would probably be the same in the U.S. -- except that he'd be less likely to get treatment beforehand, so the whole situation would be more likely. Now, that's something to be scared about.
Quote from: Mister on March 09, 2009, 06:03:24 PM
yeah, i don't believe that one bit. 50 years of jail is cheaper than a death sentence? c'mon.
It's a lot cheaper to keep them alive. There've been recent debates in some states about eliminating the death penalty because it costs so much. I'll link one when I have the time.
Dennis
Quote from: Alyssa M. on March 09, 2009, 08:19:45 PM
I have no sympathy for the view that humans as morally equivalent to animals. That is the very definition of barbarism.
Yeah. The next step is exterminating people who burp at the bus stop. It is scary.
Quote from: Rebis on March 10, 2009, 08:59:28 AM
Yeah. The next step is exterminating people who burp at the bus stop. It is scary.
Or who smile and say "hello" to you when you get on the bus.
I think Dennis is right, the costs of the trials, hearings and appeals, combined with the special conditions that Death Row inmates have to be kept in is more expensive then sticking them in a cheap jail.
And most of those reviews are pro-forma. They are in place just in case anyone with a case might get better, but in this case its never going to be found to be worthy of release. Charles Manson gets his review every few years, no one thinks they are letting him out.
Quote from: Miniar on March 09, 2009, 03:54:25 PM
Another unpopular opinion of mine, if you're sensitive you can just skip this post and not read it:
I see humans the same way as I see animals. If a dog starts attacking people, it gets put down, for the health and safety of people. The same way, if a human being starts beheading people, I'm all for the complete removal of that individual from society. If you're going to protect the health and safety of people, it should be done properly.
(Ofcourse, I'm thoroughly against killing people in the first place, but I'd rather have executions of violent criminals than room, board, good health and mental care for them for the duration of their natural lives. Insane or not.)
So would YOU be prepared to take the life of someone who has committed murder?
What right has a sane human being to take another's life?
...If someone kills another person... it is as if he had murdered all mankind. And if anyone gives life to another person, it is as if he had given life to all mankind.... (Surat al-Ma'ida: 32)
So would YOU be prepared to take the life of someone who has committed murder?
Doesn't matter, plenty of people would, and do.
You have to make sure they take there medication otherwise this stuff happens..
In my opinion they shouldn't be realised and they should be locked in a room with the key thrown away.
Jay
Quote from: imaz on March 10, 2009, 12:40:08 PM
So would YOU be prepared to take the life of someone who has committed murder?
What right has a sane human being to take another's life?
Actually, yes.
It's the right of "self preservation". Something that I wouldn't want to see done half-assed.
Quote from: Miniar on March 10, 2009, 03:03:31 PM
Actually, yes.
It's the right of "self preservation". Something that I wouldn't want to see done half-assed.
So you are in for the "tooth for a tooth, eye for an eye" scenario?
What if the murderer concerned was already arrested, would you be prepared to execute him in person?
Hi,
Just a reminder that the death penalty topic can become heated. If the thread goes into that discussion, I just want to ask that people remember to be polite to each other.
We've had this discussion before. I'm sure it is a healthy discussion for people to have. But please don't allow emotions to come into it (in a negative way).
Thanks,
Rebis
Fair enough. :)
Just like the gun issue and healthcare there is a distinct divide between European and American points of view on this issue.
For us it is inconceivable barbarity to fry someone in an electric chair or put them in a gas chamber.
We had gas chambers here in Europe in living memory, our history has changed us.
No offence meant and this is not an attempt to argue with anyone, just trying to explain the reasons for the divide. :)
Feel free to delete if you so wish. :)
Quote from: imaz on March 11, 2009, 11:25:06 AM
Fair enough. :)
Just like the gun issue and healthcare there is a distinct divide between European and American points of view on this issue.
For us it is inconceivable barbarity to fry someone in an electric chair or put them in a gas chamber.
We had gas chambers here in Europe in living memory, our history has changed us.
No offence meant and this is not an attempt to argue with anyone, just trying to explain the reasons for the divide. :)
Feel free to delete if you so wish. :)
How interesting. It strikes me that the "death penalty" was mostly done away with in Western Europe while the WWII generaion were still the "movers and shakers."
Perhaps seeing death up-close makes a difference in how one perceives "frying" the guilty. Or, perhaps the recognition that we are none of us very innocent of very much at all makes it easier to forgive or at least temper one's response. I wasn't particularly struck during the three years I lived in Germany by Germans and French, etc consistently finding their ways to maintain their "innocence" at all costs, the way i preceive us doing so here in USA.
You know, "well he did it first." I'm sure there are Europeans who did that, just i cnnot recall any of my friends doing exactly that and I seem to hear or read it over here at least once a day, if not much more.
I don't understand the blood-lust, either of the killers or the other killers who sentence the originals to die. It all seems neverending to me.
Nichole
It is never ending, every day has more horrific headlines, so it stands to reason that others would have another excuse. And, that I would, and could do it, does not mean I support it, two different deals. Life in jail is bad enough I would think.
Remember not all Americans hold "the American" view on these issues. I try to get away with telling people I'm from Canada (I can see it from my porch) but they don't believe me.
Myels
Quote from: imaz on March 10, 2009, 07:45:52 PM
So you are in for the "tooth for a tooth, eye for an eye" scenario?
I don't quite see it as such. It's not about vengeance at all to be hones.
Quote from: imaz on March 10, 2009, 07:45:52 PMWhat if the murderer concerned was already arrested, would you be prepared to execute him in person?
Yes I would.
I'm sorry, but to me, "human life" is just not
that sacred.
I am fully aware that people may take offense to my opinion, but it is my opinion. We are several billions of people and we allow our fellow human beings to starve to death (even in the streets of some cities) while there are enough resources available to us as a species to keep every last one of us fed, which I have to say is over a million times worse than taking the life of a killer could ever be in my eyes. We treat each other like dogs, 'cept when it comes to two things. If the dog would become sick and have no hope of surviving the illness, we think it the humane thing to do to allow the animal to die and not suffer being kept alive for as long as possible. And - If the dog goes mad and attacks a human being, we kill it, plain and simple for being a threat to human life.
Personally, I think death can be a better choice for people as well in these situations. Should I contract an illness that will without fail put me through a slow and painful death, I want the respect to be allowed to die. If I flip out and start causing grievous physical harm to people (I don't even have to kill anyone for this) I would like people to have the respect for themselves to have me put down (and thus keep themselves safe from me).
I would take these consequences myself, I would give them out myself, I honestly believe that this is the right thing to do. It's not about "an eye for an eye" to me, but about just plain old "respect".
I'm sorry if this offends anyone, but it's simply my opinion.
:edit: I also believe that holding anything in captivity in the manner that we hold prisoners "for life" is inhumane and not a "life". You can not have "life" in prison, only bare survival. And that alone makes me feel that if it were I, I would rather get that respect as an individual to be executed than to suffer "life" in prison, which to me is a fate worse than death. :/edit:
I'm speechless...