That's the top-rated comment at the NYT article "Boston Is Eager to Begin Marathon Bombing Trial, and to End It." The evidence of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's guilt is overwhelming. The only point of going to trial is to determine whether he'll get life in prison without the possibility of parole or the death penalty.
[Tsarnaev's lawyer Judy] Clarke is famous for cutting deals that keep her clients off death row. At some point in the process, her clients — including Theodore Kaczynski, the Unabomber; Eric Rudolph, the Olympic Park bomber; and Jared L. Loughner, who killed six people in an assassination attempt on former Representative Gabrielle Giffords — pleaded guilty in exchange for a sentence of life in prison, with no chance of parole.So far, Clarke has failed to get that deal for Tsarnaev.
ADDED: If you can't see buttons for voting in the poll, go here.
पोस्ट्स
५८ टिप्पण्या:
He should be tried, hopefully convicted, and then quickly executed.
Sadly, he will probably be in his forties at least if he ever is executed.
I'm ok with the first or last option. I voted for the last option for the reasons specified plus - death penalty cases last forever and cost a fortune; I'd prefer to just lock him up forever.
"Make him live out his natural life in a cell, with no chance of freedom."
Charles Manson is living out his natural life in a cell, with no real chance of freedom. He is soon to be married to a woman in her twenties; he gets letters from those who wish him well. People buy his artwork in prints:
"R-Card" Manson Art Prints
Special - All four R-Card prints for $36 - ($20 off)
These are high quality prints of new paintings by Charles Manson. On gloss paper. Paper size: 11x 8.5" Image size: approx. 10.5x 7"
Note: Actual prints are brighter and stronger than images below
(CM4 has a swastika, for the discerning art collector.)
He has CDs of his words and music for sale, and knows that people buy them, complete with his artwork on the cover.
Example:
"One Mind" is one of Charlie's most popular albums to date.
Originally published in 2005, this authorized re-issue features over 75 minutes of high intensity material, dramatic spoken word and Manson playing guitar and singing his own unique music.
The publication includes an eco-wallet design, new front and back cover art by Charlie.
You can listen to him performing his songs streaming on the internet.
You can read websites frequented by those who love and admire him: he know they are there.
There is, no doubt, "suffering" involved, but it still sounds better than being dead.
Helter Skelter in 2015, people.
I am Laslo.
That top rated comment is a wonderful example of pretending to know what goes on in other people's minds so as to justify the author's own position on the death penalty.
I vote they do whatever will cost taxpayers the least amount of money. His feelings and preferences should not even remotely be a consideration.
The reason for the death penalty isn't punishment or deterrence.
It's to honor the place society gives to the voice of the victim, a voice that is missing.
The place, not the voice. The victim might have been against the death penalty, and it doesn't matter.
So the comment makes no sense except to say that the commenter misunderstands the death penalty.
I'm really torn. I do, as a rule, favor the death penalty for a sufficiently heinous crime. On the other hand I like the idea of someone who thinks of himself as a religious warrior rotting away in a prison.
@rhhardin, I agree with your sentiments, but I'm still torn in this particular case.
So, if life imprisonment is "worse" than the death penalty, it makes all the cons seeking that deal baffling, doesn't it?
I think a poll of his victims would be a better starting point, rather than a poll of blog readers.
That said, I vote for an eternity in prison.
The poll should have one more option. No - then no extreme Islamic terrorist cell can ever take hostages and attempt to trade them for a jailed Tsarnaev. To me, that is a reason why the death penalty should be imposed in this case.
It used to be that victims were the ones said to be left "dead inside" by the crime.
Now the worst perps come to the crime "dead inside".
Ergo, they must be victims before they commit the crime.
Accordingly, liberals always conjure reasons to release them early.
Re: what Anonymous said:
The trade gambit is an interesting wrinkle in jurisprudence these days. And it is being done more and more in the world: justice being nullified by executive actions.
A new argument to add to the mix.
Kill him. He will be a martyr no matter what. Slit his throat on the courthouse steps and place his head on a pike in front of the statehouse would be my preferred method.
@Damiskesc/
Not baffling if one thinks another Obama might come along to commute one's sentence or hand out pardons. What do you think is going to happen when Obama leaves office? Any takers on the over/under on the number of cop killers he will pardon? Hell, he's already just released a terrorist from GITMO, who, besides being a major AQ commander and bomb-maker, was caught while transporting weapons-grade uranium. That act of Obama's ALONE qualifies as a treasonable offense with death by firing squad, let alone impeachment, if you ask me.
Get the MA legislature to change the method to the electric chair, and then light the fucker up.
Hold a lottery. Winner gets to stuff his mouth with bacon and execute him personally.
He's not dead enough to me.
I'm conflicted. I went with the last option...
On the one hand, I like the idea of impaling him on a short stake on the Boston Common. There is nothing heroic about bleeding out with your legs covered in $hit while you whimper...
On the other hand, the Eastern Romans had a passable alternative for criminals. They had a deep pit in the basement with a trap door. They just pushed you and your conspirators in, and closed the trap door, and went away. forever.
You died, in the cold wet dark, with you hunting rats for food, your friends hunting you for food, and the rats winning the day...
From Wiki:
"Mumia Abu-Jamal (born Wesley Cook[1] April 24, 1954) is an American former activist and journalist who was convicted and sentenced to death on July 3, 1982, for the December 1981 murder of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner.[2] His sentence was commuted to life imprisonment without parole in December 2011..."
So: instead of death he has authored books to acclaim, had radio and online broadcasts, received an honorary degree, recorded a commencement address, was a regular columnist for a German Marxist newspaper and has thousands of adoring followers who support him and/or proclaim his innocence.
Evading the death penalty certainly seems more cruel than death when you think about it, or so I hear.
I am Laslo.
So, if life imprisonment is "worse" than the death penalty, it makes all the cons seeking that deal baffling, doesn't it?
Exactly...how many times do you hear murderers holding out for the death penalty instead of life in prison?
Islamic terrorists aren't dead inside.
They just want others to be dead inside.
So many Althouse readers eager to see the state kill somebody.
I'd favor not a poll of the victims but rather of their surviving family members. If they all think he should get life imprisonment rather than death, then I'm fine with it. If, however, just one thinks, he needs killing, then that's the way to go. It's better to execute a hundred guilty murderers rather than have just one innocent family member suffer a sleepless night.
B said...
So many Althouse readers eager to see the state kill somebody.
Once he is dead he can no longer hurt anyone else. One he is dead there is no longer a worry that he may escape and hurt any one else. Once he is dead he cannot proselytize his sick religion and convert others to and encourage others to kill.
Finally
"Thank god for the death penalty. Without it I couldn't control these guys."
Warden, Stateville Penitentiary.
So many Althouse readers eager to see the state kill somebody
Eager?
Not exactly.
Certainly far less eager than the Left is eager to see women kill their unborn children.
. I say, make him suffer; he deserves it. Make him live out his natural life in a cell, with no chance of freedom
But that extended suffering might make life imprisonment cruel, right, and (since we've apparently dropped the "unusual" when evaluating Constitutionality) that cruelty means it's more in line with our laws to execute than to imprison for life. #liberal(half)logic
I'm with Drill Sgt. But have a big strong woman do the deed. I understand death at a woman's hand denies them their virgins.
B
We would prefer to waterboard him and let him go, but that would be against the law.
The anti-death penalty elites and sincere loving hearts have always thrown out their pretense of loving mercy for poor killers when one of their own was the one attacked.
Spectators at the Boston Marathon is one of their own.
Strangled, beheaded and drawn and quartered in public is still precedent for attacking the elites.
I like the bacon idea but watch out for an Obama pardon if he is alive.
What do Tsarnaev, Kaczyniski, and Rudolph have in common? The FBI botched the investigation into each one of these criminals.
B,
Studies show that the death penalty reduces the murder rate.
Who is the death monger here?
I know this sounds Stalinist, but he needs to just disappear. Public execution would be too much drama and ensure martyrdom. Life in prison would mean too many opportunities to exploit media coverage and would convey a small degree of martyrdom. But if he just vanishes; the Jihadists won't know if he's alive, dead, or living in witness protection in Idaho after having ratted them out.
His crimes err.. alleged crimes demand retribution. Kill him, esp so Commandante Zero can't pardon him. BTW- any guesses on whether Barry-O pardons Mumia?
Oh, and MA pass the death penalty? HA HA HA HA HA.....
I AM not thrilled about giving the state the power to execute- especially the soulless bureaucratic monster state we have today, but we are at war with monsters like " the Joker".
The problem with giving someone the punishment of life in prison because "it's worse than death" is that at some point, a group of leftist jerks may find enough compassion to release the prisoner.
If the prisoner is dead, it's OK to release him, because then, he can't do it again.
tim in Vermont,
Yes, I will accept a little more murder if it means the state isn't allowed to kill people.
Just like I accept a little more murder if it means the state can't take away our guns.
If that makes me a death monger, then so be it.
The correct option is:
No, WE deserve his death.
Oh, c'mon, people, this is the People's republic of Massachusetts we're talking about here!
They're not going to execute him & have Tsarnaev's blood on their pretty consciences. It'll be life & exclamations all around afterwards about how "That Judy Clark! Why, that girl could get the Devil sprung from Hades!".
I can write this today because i couldn'find a parking space in the Back Bay ten minutes before the bombs went off. I was heading for a Starbucks on Boylston Street and perhaps a chance to view the runners, which is always fun and inspiring. The Starbucks was almost ground zero for the explosions. Instead I said, "If we don't find a space in the next five minutes let's just go," We couldn't, we did and thankfully I'm here. This ever so brief and tenuous brush with death or maiming haunted me for weeks afterward. This guy deserves to be hung in public, wearing a bacon belt, so, as others have stated, he doesn't do it again, show up on NPR, become a cover boy for Time or the New Yorker or the Atlantic, have multiple wives in jail, sue the Commonwealth for hair transplants, but especially to let the victims find some peace.
There isn't a great poll option for people who don't believe in capital punishment in any case.
I was anti-death penalty, even as I'm anti-abortion -- life is life and must be preserved, and I think a lifetime spent in a hellhole is better than a quick, clean execution. But recently they put on trial a guy -- who was already in for murder -- who, in his time in prison, had attempted to kill a guard and maimed another inmate. He may be in prison for life, but he's still a danger to the humans who have to be around him. So I've come around to the idea that some folks just need killin'. He will be a martyr either way, but he will not continue to be an attractant to jihadists and be available for interviews and sympathy. He'll be over with, and we all move on.
I don't know what you're talking about, everyone tells me there has been no terrorist attacks against the US since 9/11.
Yes, I will accept a little more murder if it means the state isn't allowed to kill people.
Would you accept occupation and subjugation rather than a war?
That's the state killing people.
"The poll should have one more option. No - then no extreme Islamic terrorist cell can ever take hostages and attempt to trade them for a jailed Tsarnaev. To me, that is a reason why the death penalty should be imposed in this case."
Exactly. And make it speedy.
Long for death? Nope. They lack a developed Prefrontal Orbital Cortex, and hence, a conscience. It is a brain defect that makes them so utterly dangerous, not a death wish.
Trey
The jury should decide.
I do protest against this poll & the journalism, because I think the more he sees his name in lights the better he feels about his deed.
He does have a cult following, and it is more than possible that other crimes will be committed to free him, or hostages taken on his account.
So if I were on the jury, I would vote to whack him. I think, at this point, society's interests and most particularly the interests of anyone who might be injured by him in the future predominate.
I don't think the death penalty is crueler or harsher than life in prison without parole.
I don't think the argument that a criminal will suffer more with a LWOP sentence is ethically respectable or even deserves a response. I think such a statement indicts the author of it. If we wanted maximum punishment, we would torture them instead of trying to put them to death as painlessly as possible.
Our jails aren't truly hell holes. And life there is a hell of a lot better than death.
If they don't execute him, he'll just become a celebrity for the kooks and 10 years from now we'll be reading sympathetic stories from the usual social justice morons that he's a "political prisoner".
The argument that he will suffer more in jail alive than rotting in the ground is so much bullshit meant to give cover to anti-death penalty activism.
[Tsarnaev's lawyer Judy] Clarke is famous for cutting deals that keep her clients off death row. At some point in the process, her clients — including Theodore Kaczynski, the Unabomber; Eric Rudolph, the Olympic Park bomber; and Jared L. Loughner, who killed six people in an assassination attempt on former Representative Gabrielle Giffords — pleaded guilty in exchange for a sentence of life in prison, with no chance of parole."
How can the government be so incompetent? The prosecutors ought to be executed for criminal incompetence for botching these cases. As for Tsarnaev just get a rope and get it over with. No one is going to get LWOP in a jail cell with no human contact whatsoever and there is no guarantee that he will not have his sentence reduced in the future.
What will the big O do when ISIS wants to trade him for a hostage?
Cubanbob:
How can the government be so incompetent? The prosecutors ought to be executed for criminal incompetence for botching these cases.
Following your logic, you would agree, would you not, that every (most, some, few???) capital murder prosecutors that wrongly convicted an innocent had to be incompetent, therefore would be subject to execution.
Fritz:
Barry Hussein Ozero will do like he always does. He'll send in the drones to grease a wedding then follow up with a Seal Team Six Op on the new Osama.
"Consciously or subconsciously, they long for death. The State then rewards them by giving them the death penalty. I say, make him suffer; he deserves it. Make him live out his natural life in a cell, with no chance of freedom."
Seriously?
Give him a fair trial, a vigorous defense. Assuming a guilty verdict from a jury of his peers, execute him at earliest convenience.
Goodbye, trash. Like the Hebrew American weiner, soon to be answerable to a higher authority.
Do not write books in prison, get married, endanger guards or other prisoners. Do not require feeding, medical care or sex change surgery. Do not become the darling of radicals or those who think you are a victim of circumstance and youth.
Just, you know, drop dead.
The reason for the death penalty is to evidence how society values life. If you kill, and if there's no doubt that you killed, and you did so intentionally, and if there's no excuse for your act, then you should be executed. Surely this applies in this case. Otherwise, we as a society show that we value the life of the killer more than we value the life of the victims.
Yes, indeed, there are punishments worse than execution. If you really think that death is too easy for this person, we can discuss drawing and quartering, the rack, dismemberment, etc. But if you are arguing that life imprisonment is a harsher punishment than execution, I'll need some evidence to persuade me.
The Godfather said, "and if there's no doubt that you killed"
Glad we cleared that up. No reason to search for the innocent on death row anymore. There's no doubt they killed otherwise they wouldn't be there.
@ B: That's not what I said. I said "if". If (note the word) you don't apologize, you're stupid.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा