November 10, 2009

No longer among the living.

John Allen Muhammad.

48 comments:

Big Mike said...

Hard to say he didn't deserve it. Particularly after shooting the child.

Kev said...

(the other kev)

I hope this brings some measure of closure and peace to the families and friends of his victims.

Him, not so much. Some crimes really do deserve the maximum punishment.

edutcher said...

If you want an illustration of what a cold-blooded killer looks like, Muhammad (sp?) is/was it.

Gabriel Hanna said...

I don't think much of the death penalty for retribution, and I don't know if it is a deterrent to others or not.

But I do know that Muhammad will never kill anyone again. Not a civilian, not a guard, not another prisoner.

David said...

The known victims of murder at the hand of John Allen Muhammad:

Alex Napper
James Martin
James Buchanan
Premkumar Walekar
Sarah Ramos
Lori Ann-Lewis Rivera
Pascal Charlot
Dean Harold Meyers
Kenneth Bridges
Linda Franklin
Carnell Johnson

R.I.P.

traditionalguy said...

The death penalty for cold blooded killers is for our protection and it works. I feel safer already.

Chef Mojo said...

I don't give a fig about the "deterrent" effect of the death penalty.

There is nothing wrong with retribution and punishment.

As a Virginian, I am very glad to see that the Commonwealth is still capable of carrying out such a punishment in a relatively timely fashion.

Were I not an atheist, I would hope this sonofabitch would burn in hell, simply to further his punishment.

Alas.

MadisonMan said...

That was pretty fast. Not the killing itself -- that was a fast as it usually is -- but trial->death row->execution.

It helps when the evidence so completely pointed to him.

EDH said...

No longer among the living.

Or, as I like to say, "won't be down for breakfast."

Angst said...

It just stared to rain about an hour ago.

I pray for all of them - the shooter, his accomplice, his victims, and most importantly the families and loved ones who are still grieving their passing.

miller said...

That man threw his life away and took the lives of others.

What a waste. And what terrible crimes.

Fred4Pres said...

I can't say there is any doubt about this one. I know Allah disapproves, but what the heck:

John Mohammed: Hey look Tim McVeigh and Mohammed Atta are here. Cool. Hey wait a second, it is kinda hot here, what is that red hot poker for, AHHHHHHH…

And Nidal Hasan, you are next...

edutcher said...

When I hear of those murders, I'm always reminded of a woman I knew named Linda Franklin. Very nice, very together lady.

Hope she wasn't that one.

AJ Lynch said...

Remember how he had that whole area terrorized? I drove to WV [not word verification] thru Frederick, MD a few days before he and Malvo were captured in Frederick. I remember being a little nervous pumping gas on my trip.

They were leaving the DC area when they were caught IMO. Some trucker spotted their car parked at a rest stop and the cops swooped in.

He is now in hell for sure. Kudos to Virginia for following its laws!

elHombre said...

Were I not an atheist, I would hope this sonofabitch would burn in hell, simply to further his punishment.

You can hope it anyway. God will forgive your lapse, but probably not his.

Scott said...

It's amazing how many "Christians" are in favor of the death penalty.

The absolutely weirdest argument I ever got from such a person was that Christ allowed Himself to be crucified; therefore it was His tacit endorsement of capital punishment.

To my way of thinking, no Christian worthy of the name supports the death penalty.

Bob said...

Oh, so Mohammed is enjoying his virgins now? I hope that they all look like Helen Thomas of the AP.

Chef Mojo said...

Scott, that's the lamest piece of horseshit I've seen posted here in quite awhile.

Really, why shouldn't christians support the death penalty? What explicitly in the bible says to not support it?

Punishment and retribution are to be carried out in the most heinous of crimes. There is no shame in that, nor is it somehow "progressive" to oppose it.

As long as people give in to their basest and most savage instincts, then the rest of society has an obligation to respond in kind and kill them without reservation and without mercy.

AJ Lynch said...

Scott:

How interesting- you use the argument of [what sounds like] a very dumb individual to criticize a religious group with a billion or so people.

While I have found most of the commenters here who use only a first name for their username are dim and uninformed.

AJ Lynch said...

Bob you are an exception to my rule. And I am pretty sure no one would admit to screwing Helen. So she could be a virgin.

fabian said...

"Thou shall not kill" Exodus 20:13
It seem pretty straight forward to me.

miller said...

"Thou shalt not murder."

Plus there are plenty of crimes for which the penalty is death in the O.T.

So it would be weird to say "you can't kill by government sanction" and "you can kill by government sanction."

The logical result of thinking this through would be to say "the O.T. forbids murder, but allows for an adjudicated death penalty."

Bill said...

Fabian, it's only kill in some translations. I think in most, it's "Thou shalt not murder."

Albatross said...

Fred said: And Nidal Hasan, you are next...

Unfortunately, probably not.

Chef Mojo said...

@ Fabian

Bullshit.

Obviously there are exceptions to the rule. They're all through the bible.

Besides, executions were quite common in biblical times, for offenses we would sneer at now. Tell me; were those executions carried out in the name of "deterrence?'

I seriously doubt it. Punishment. Retribution. Revenge. Why should we be different now? Because we have a kindler, gentler means of offing each other at a distance? We are what we are. We kill, for whatever reason, and if those reasons are not sanctioned by society, then we, in turn, are killed.

By quoting exodus, do you therefore subscribe to the rest of what happens in the old testament? Curious to know.

former law student said...

The only problem with the death penalty here is that it's inadequate: taking one life can never make up for the ten that he took.

cubanbob said...

" former law student said...
The only problem with the death penalty here is that it's inadequate: taking one life can never make up for the ten that he took.

11/11/09 12:07 AM"

Keeping him alive is an insult to the victims and there families and a sign of weakness to the Jihadi's.

vbspurs said...

Thank you for the list, David. That's precisely what we needed to remember.

Cheers,
Victoria

Dark Eden said...

It's amazing how many "Christians" are in favor of the death penalty.

The absolutely weirdest argument I ever got from such a person was that Christ allowed Himself to be crucified; therefore it was His tacit endorsement of capital punishment.

To my way of thinking, no Christian worthy of the name supports the death penalty.
>>>>

Well I'm not a Christian I'm a Pagan. So personally I would cut his head off, bathe it in pig's blood, put it in a box with a note in Arabic that translated roughly as 'bring it' and ship it to his fellow jihadi's as a sign of things to come.

But we're too civilized for that kind of thing, sadly.

Youngblood said...

Scott wrote:

"It's amazing how many 'Christians' are in favor of the death penalty."

Classic troll is classic!

Scott said...

It's funny how I just make a simple statement about the death penalty, and all of a sudden people who you think would know better start dragging out the ad hominem arguments, calling me stupid, or a troll, etc.

Nothing that Christ ever said or did supported or justified capital punishment. It's not consistent with his Two Great Commandments.

A worthless institution is a "Christian" church that doesn't strive to liberate one from the earthly vices and toward a life in God's love. For John Allen Muhammad, murder was a vice; thrill killing justified by some vague and nebulous sense of retribution. The State of Virginia committed premeditated murder on John Allen Muhammed using the same muzzy moral math; except that because the State does it, the general public can share a little bit of what the perp felt when he pulled the trigger. It's America's way of doing the Two Minute Hate. It only serves to make weak politicians look tough; only lets weak DAs bury their mistakes; does not make the public safer than putting the perp in jail for life with no hope of parole; only feeds the public's baser instincts to no beneficial social purpose.

For "Christians" to embrace state-sponsored premeditated murder is exceptionally strange, even if it is commonplace. Abortion and the death penalty are pretty effective litmust tests with which to distinguish Christians from "cultural Christians," the latter being those with a Pharasaic relationship with the Bible, who are more willing to beat you with it than read it and live it.

I'll bet dollars to donuts that a lot of you name-callers don't even go to church. Y'all are the trolls, not me -- you're less than worthless.

traditionalguy said...

Christian thought on the death penalty: Thou shall do no murder is the actual commandment. The death penalty for murder was the first commandment given to fallen man to restrain the popularity of murder as an acceptible form of ego gratification, such as gang initiations requirements and the killing people over percieved insults. Ending that culture of murder as self expression was the reason given in scripture for God's decision to wipe out all living humans but Noah and his family and some animals and start over. When the Ark landed, the death penalty was instituted. Jesus who came to forgive men and not condemn men also left in place the laws God gave us to restrain a culture of murder by bearing the sword against murderers.Jesus was not so cruel as to leave us in a lawless world until he returns.

Paul Zrimsek said...

If there are people about who are "less than worthless", what possible objection could there be to killing them? Granted, we're talking about the real sinners-- those who disagree with Pope Scott-- but it's enough to establish the general principle.

Cedarford said...

fabian said...
"Thou shall not kill" Exodus 20:13
It seem pretty straight forward to me.


A trite saying by ignorant Pacifists who don't understand it is a mistranslation for "thou shall not murder."
Obviously, the Hebrews that wrote it were not vegans under their Covenent with Yahweh. In fact, they were supposed to slaughter things as offerings - Able pleased more than Abraham's son Cain, the vegan and murderer son...with his slaughter offerings.
Nor were the Hebrews of Exodus reticent about killing enemy, or imploring God to do some good butcher for his "Chosen Ones".

==================
FLS - former law student said...
The only problem with the death penalty here is that it's inadequate: taking one life can never make up for the ten that he took,


FLS, you are arguing a variant of the "Lazarus Problem of Criminal Justice" in respect to the death penalty.

Death Penalty foes argue that "killing the murderer will never bring the victims back".

True.

But neither will throwing them in jail.

Or just letting them go free and praying that their slain victims resurrect themselves or a Jesus-like official of the criminal justice system will achieve resurrection.

Given those limitations, not having God-like powers to heal, cure, undo a rape or child molestation, get restitution from a thief with no money....I guess our criminal justice system will have to just plod along and accept restitution when possible...and listen to what society and victims want of disposition of criminals or in the case of organized terroristic Islamoids - unlawful enemy combatants.

=================
John Mohammed? All I can think is "Toodles, Islamoid!" With gratitude it only took 7 years to dispatch him, and knowing he is no longer a burden on taxpayers, and less of a burden on the minds of those who cherished the people he and Sniper Boy Malvo killed and wounded, and those who survived devestating high velocity rifle bullet injuries.

former law student said...

FLS, you are arguing a variant of the "Lazarus Problem of Criminal Justice"

?

Society must be satisfied with killing Muhammad once, because it is not possible to kill him ten times. But murderers must not be allowed to live -- no society should tolerate the extermination of its members.

Does the state's euthanasia of murderers constitute murder in itself? (At present, murderers are humanely destroyed as one would a terminally ill pet.) No. By killing another human being the murderer voluntarily forfeits his own life.

Is the death penalty unChristian? Romans 13 teaches us that God has authorized governments to punish evildoers: But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it [government] does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.

pst314 said...

"no Christian worthy of the name supports the death penalty."

and

"It's funny how I just make a simple statement about the death penalty, and all of a sudden people who you think would know better start dragging out the ad hominem arguments, calling me stupid, or a troll, etc."

Maybe if you didn't cast aspersions on them, they would treat you with more kindness. As it is, your theological ignorance combined with your social cluelessnes garner you no friends.

knox said...

For "Christians" to embrace state-sponsored premeditated murder is exceptionally strange

What a great example of moral equivalence. You're like the people who say that our defensive responses to terrorism are as bad as terrorism itself. Nonsense.

##

I am against the death penalty only because of the innocent people who've been put to death because of some flaw in the system. When there is definite proof, DNA evidence or the like, I have no problem with it.

Scott said...

"Maybe if you didn't cast aspersions on them, they would treat you with more kindness."

I dunno, call me fay, but I've always had a thing for casting aspersions on the hypocritical and morally repugnant.

miller said...

"The only problem with the death penalty here is that it's inadequate: taking one life can never make up for the ten that he took."

Well, true that, but it's a start.

Dark Eden said...

I dunno, call me fay, but I've always had a thing for casting aspersions on the hypocritical and morally repugnant.
>>>

Hypocrisy. The only moral crime the left recognizes.

..

Oh other than driving the wrong car.

And using the wrong light bulb.

And using too much hot water.

And answering the wrong way to a question in a beauty pageant.

And being in the wrong religion.

And being a minority and a member of the wrong party.

And being against raising taxes.

And daring to question man caused global warming.

And daring to point out that the globe hasn't been warming in over a decade. That's just tacky tacky people.

And daring to say that maybe war is the answer.

And daring to question our betters in Europe. Except for those dirty fascist not-socialist ones like Sarkozy.

And daring to question whether the life of the unborn child maybe just maybe trumps the choice of the mother.

Where was I going with this? Oh yes. Hypocrisy. Its bad. Don't do it kids. Be a purehearted noble world saving liberal not one of those judgemental Christian Rethuglikkkan evangelical redneck teabaggers.

Jim Hanson said...

Another to add to the honor roll of dead tangos.

I do prefer to say that he has now assumed room temperature if we are going to euphemize.

Cordially,

Uncle J

traditionalguy said...

For the political thinkers out there, please consider that the power of a government to rule and cause peace and prosperity from a social order depends upon a Monopoly power over killing people. That is why men try to usurp the killing power and rule their own small kingdoms...Drug Lords, private militias, areas where police don't go for fear of their lives. Chaiman Mao's insight that all political power comes from the barrell of a gun is correct. The restraint of Kings use of that monopoly begins in our tradition with the Jury of your peers trial in the Magna Carta to restrain the kings using the power to kill their enemies on false criminal or treason charges. And today that tradition still gives the accused more rights prior to a jury trial conviction than we give mere citizens who do as they are told. A good read on this subject is a 1980s best seller "Murder in Coweta County" which is a true story of how the state's monopoly on killing people works for the best.

Seneca the Younger said...

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

Seneca the Younger said...

Scott, that's the lamest piece of horseshit I've seen posted here in quite awhile.

Wow, that's quite a statement.

I'm not saying it's wrong, but it suggests he exceeded what is, after all, a pretty high standard.

Scott said...

Althouse blog comments are a case study in how groupthink works. (I'd be hurt if I took y'all seriously.)

miller said...

Scott -- you are so insightful!

Please stick around so you can tell us how to un-groupthink.

Plus, bonus points if you tell us how to subscribe to your newsletter.

former law student said...

a case study in how groupthink works

Note how the one who loves his neighbor as himself does not consider that prison guards are his neighbor, nor are our incarcerated brothers:

[the death penalty] does not make the public safer than putting the perp in jail for life with no hope of parole

Changing a criminal's environment so that he is less likely to repeat his crime is inadequate. One might as well attempt to punish a wife-batterer by forbidding him to remarry.

Here, moreover, "the perp" is still alive even though his freedom has been constrained. One can lose many of one's freedoms and still be better off than the dead. Though my grandfather, living in the nursing home, longed for the days when he could drive anywhere he wanted, he still enjoyed his every day on earth.

Geoff Matthews said...

A few comments:

"The only problem with the death penalty here is that it's inadequate: taking one life can never make up for the ten that he took."

Well, holding them in prison doesn't either. Some crimes cannot be undone. When it comes to murder, it isn't retribution, it's punishment and protection. The death penalty satisfies both nicely.

As far as Christians having sympathy for the murderer, I'll admit to being a Christian, but my desire to protect law-abiding citizens is greater than protecting murderers. The death penalty creates a situation where the murderer knows when they will die. They can use this knowledge to prepare to meet God, or they can use it for other purposes. But the primary function of government is to protect the law-abiding.

I'll also add that they way prisons are managed today are deplorable, with the levels of rape and violence that are tolerated. I would make rape in prison a capital offense. If we want our prisons to be institutions of reform, we need to have more control over them.