Current Events > Pittsburgh synagogue shooter sentenced to death

(+) Yeah! (+)

Tyranthraxus posted...

Like I already mentioned they have one of the lowest recidivism rates in the world. Everyone eventually gets out of prison there. That includes murderers and rapists and pedophiles and such. And after they get out, they usually don't commit any new crimes. They are far more qualified to judge when people are ready to be released then your intuition.

It's low and impressively so but 20-25 % is still way too high to chance for a mass murderer.

Don't tell RuneterranSnap that though, the way he's going on you'd think Norway had a recidivism rate of 0.

ForsakenHermit posted...

The victims of Holmes and Loughner have gotten a closure from the two of them being locked up that Breivik's victims have not and it's awful that they never will.

Have they actually asked for that?

DrizztLink posted...

Have they actually asked for that?

Like with any sample size that large I'm sure opinions are diverse, but I can't see any of them thinking it's better than a necessary evil.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

The point is that it's not about what they deserve, it's about what serves society at large best, and what serves society best is a system that keeps the dangerous people locked up and lets out the ones that are reformed regardless of how you feel about their release.

ForsakenHermit posted...

It's low and impressively so but 20-25 % is still way too high to chance for a mass murderer.

Don't tell RuneterranSnap that though, the way he's going on you'd think Norway had a recidivism rate of 0.

Actually I knew it was around there. I also know, if he were ever to be released as reformed, he's still going to be HEAVILY monitored and it's not a danger.

ForsakenHermit posted...

Like with any sample size that large I'm sure opinions are diverse, but I can't see any of them thinking it's better than a necessary evil.

Or are you attributing your personal perceptions onto a country that is already happy with its system and sees no need to change it for some hypothetical "closure" that may or may not be wanted or even exist?

RuneterranSnap posted...

The point is that it's not about what they deserve, it's about what serves society at large best, and what serves society best is a system that keeps the dangerous people locked up and lets out the ones that are reformed regardless of how you feel about their release.

Actually I knew it was around there. I also know, if he were ever to be released as reformed, he's still going to be HEAVILY monitored and it's not a danger.

If you know it's there stop acting like the system in Norway is infallible.

ForsakenHermit posted...

If you know it's there stop acting like the system there is infallible.

I'm acting like their system is smarter than you are. Because it is.

RuneterranSnap posted...

I'm acting like their system is smarter than you are. Because it is.

The Nordic systems that have life imprisonment are smarter than you will ever dream of being, not like that's a high bar to clear.

RuneterranSnap posted...

I'm acting like their system is smarter than you are. Because it is.

He does not deserve to ever be free again. Not ever. I personally am fine with him also rotting in a cell forever with no hope. Execute him or not either way he will receive justice.

TonyKojima posted...

deserve

There's that irrelevant word again.

ForsakenHermit posted...

The Nordic systems that have life imprisonment are smarter than you will ever dream of being, not like that's a high bar to clear.

Higher than it is for you. Bye now :)

So I assume you feel the Nazi war criminals at Nuremburg should have been given the chance at "rehabilitation".

If Breivik ever got released and killed more people than he did the first go around Rune and Dizzy would go to their graves saying Norway made the right call in releasing him.

RuneterranSnap posted...

There's that irrelevant word again.

Higher than it is for you. Bye now :)

I cleared that bar long before you ever knew I existed.

Thank you, fuck you, bye!

ForsakenHermit posted...

It's low and impressively so but 20-25 % is still way too high to chance for a mass murderer.

Don't tell RuneterranSnap that though, the way he's going on you'd think Norway had a recidivism rate of 0.

Norway's prison infrastructure is not that different from the US. The difference comes in how the prisoners are treated themselves.

You've got sort of your standard prison that is similar to an American one. If you're good, and work hard to demonstrate that you're ready to change, you can apply for a transfer to another prison. But it's less of a prison and more like a boot camp where you have access to luxuries like internet, privacy, and so on, with some educational / vocational rehabilitation.

If you do good there, you can get transferred again to something like minsec or parole where you can do things like get a real job as long as you make the proper reporting.

It's a very slow, gradual, and guided reintroduction to society, with lots of steps along the way that you can fail at if you're not sincere. It's not like they give you an interview and you go "yeah I'm a totally changed man" "welp good enough for me let him out"

Of course the alternative is to just wait out your sentence in the strict facility. Those guys will have higher recidivism than people who go through the reintroduction program.

As for whether or not a mass murderer could ever actually complete such a task I don't know, but if they did, I'd think it's worth considering their freedom.

Anders isn't that person, but that doesn't mean that person doesn't exist at all.

TonyKojima posted...

So I assume you feel the Nazi war criminals at Nuremburg should have been given the chance at "rehabilitation".

Yes. I don't think it'd take, just like I don't think it would with Breivik, but a system works best when EVERYONE gets treated equally.

Tyranthraxus posted...

Norway's prison infrastructure is not that different from the US. The difference comes in how the prisoners are treated themselves.

You've got sort of your standard prison that is similar to an American one. If you're good, and work hard to demonstrate that you're ready to change, you can apply for a transfer to another prison. But it's less of a prison and more like a boot camp where you have access to luxuries like internet, privacy, and so on, with some educational / vocational rehabilitation.

If you do good there, you can get transferred again to something like minsec or parole where you can do things like get a real job as long as you make the proper reporting.

It's a very slow, gradual, and guided reintroduction to society, with lots of steps along the way that you can fail at if you're not sincere. It's not like they give you an interview and you go "yeah I'm a totally changed man" "welp good enough for me let him out"

Of course the alternative is to just wait out your sentence in the strict facility. Those guys will have higher recidivism than people who go through the reintroduction program.

As for whether or not a mass murderer could ever actually complete such a task I don't know, but if they did, I'd think it's worth considering their freedom.

Anders isn't that person, but that doesn't mean that person doesn't exist at all.

I'm aware of how the Norwegean prison system works.

I can't see eye to eye with releasing a repentant mass murderer. Improve prison conditions sure but full release? No, out of the question.

At least you realize Anders is a lost cause.

RuneterranSnap posted...

Yes. I don't think it'd take, just like I don't think it would with Breivik, but a system works best when EVERYONE gets treated equally.

Unacceptable.

Ah sweet silence

TonyKojima posted...

Unacceptable.

Not up to you.

RuneterranSnap posted...

Not up to you.

No but the powers that be shared my opinion. They were rightfully hanged for war crimes.

TonyKojima posted...

No but the powers that be shared my opinion. They were rightfully hanged for war crimes.

Corporal punishment is still objectively wrong.

Getting caught up arguing with Tony is a fitting fate for a hack like Rune. Especially considering Rune thinks mass murderers can be made to be a non-threat all while claiming to care about the safety of the public.

Part of me supports the death penalty being used for the truly irredeemable, worst of the worst criminals like this piece of shit, but at the same time as long as there is any kind of death penalty, there's a risk of innocent people being charged with crimes they didn't commit, and to me any risk of the state killing an innocent person is unacceptable.

That said, my personal opposition to the death penalty isn't going to make me unhappy with this terrorist getting the chair.

Good for him. Too bad they can't do it over the weekend and be done with it

sith9er posted...

Good for him. Too bad they can't do it over the weekend and be done with it

Thankfully nobody will ever listen to this ridiculous and horrific opinion.

I'm sure Rune also thinks that recent trial with that girl Taylor Schabusiness who murdered and dismembered her boyfriend and left his head in a bucket for his mom to find can be rehabilitated.

TonyKojima posted...

I'm sure Rune also thinks that recent trial with that girl Taylor Schabusiness who murdered and dismembered her boyfriend and left his head in a bucket for his mom to find can be rehabilitated.

Yes we know you lack reading comprehension.

Ok, so, you are against the death penalty because there might be a mistake and an innocent person killed, ok.
But you are for a release if a mass murder makes amends, despite the fact it could be a long con and in fact, a mistake?
Why do you acknowledge there could be a mistake in assigning the death penalty but not in releasing a mass murderer?

I'm neither for or against the death penalty in and of itself. I prefer to look at it on a case by case basis. In cases like this I feel like it's the wrong way to go. It gives the guilty the easiest way out. I think they should be made to suffer in solitude for as long as they shall live naturally and this is cruel of me, but should the guilty come down with cancer in their later years and be suffering, we should offer them no treatment. This would be reserved specifically for terrorists who kill multiple people or those who murder children.

I know a lot of people will really hate my point of view on the situation.

RuneterranSnap posted...

Yes we know you lack reading comprehension.

Thankfully though she will never have that opportunity. I'm a center left liberal but even giving psychopaths like these people "second chances" is a bridge too far.

Shamino posted...

Ok, so, you are against the death penalty because there might be a mistake and an innocent person killed, ok.
But you are for a release if a mass murder makes amends, despite the fact it could be a long con and in fact, a mistake?

You're assuming they could con the people.

RuneterranSnap posted...

You're assuming they could con the people.

You assume there isn't a long con. How will you have 100 percent proof there isn't and make the mistake of releasing a mass murderer?

RuneterranSnap posted...

Thankfully nobody will ever listen to this ridiculous and horrific opinion.

Not as ridiculous and horrific as giving them the possibility getting out and doing it again.

Shamino posted...

You assume there isn't a long con. How will you have 100 percent proof there isn't and make the mistake of releasing a mass murderer?

Because they aren't idiots. He isn't going to con the parole board.

sith9er posted...

Not as ridiculous and horrific as giving them the possibility getting out and doing it again.

Significantly more because none of them are being given such a chance.

RuneterranSnap posted...

Because they aren't idiots. He isn't going to con the parole board.

Significantly more because none of them are being given such a chance.

You do realize people have conned the parole board, been released, and then committed crimes, right?
You are acting like a parole board isn't infallible.

Pro-death penalty here (and inTexas).

Why did they take their time to prosecute this dude?

If you don't know the difference between murder and killing, you shouldn't post on this subject.

If you don't see why the distinction matters, you shouldn't post on this subject.

Fair, next.

TonyKojima posted...

I'm sure Rune also thinks that recent trial with that girl Taylor Schabusiness who murdered and dismembered her boyfriend and left his head in a bucket for his mom to find can be rehabilitated.

Look, no one here who opposes the death penalty believes that all criminals can be saved or that forgiveness can be earned for every crime.

What we are saying however is that a system that allows its members to behave in a similar fashion to those it is trying to punish is the definition of hypocrisy. I dont know what the maximum punishment for our most heinous criminals should be. I mean, the supermax is pushing it as far as Im concerned. But there is something insidious about walking someone to the gallows or gas chamber or tied to a bed while someone gives them two needles to stop their heart. There is something distasteful about asking twelve regular civilians to condemn someone to die, and then have to live their lives every day with the consequences of that decision. To my mind, it just doesnt seem right that the government be allowed to exact vengeance on the accused in the name of the victim. The only exception of course is when there is no other choice, like when a police officer needs to stop a mass shooter in the act or when hunting suicide bombers.

Tyranthraxus posted...

but him being executed means there exists a vector for other people who are innocent to be executed.

No because this is somebody caught who is 100% guilty. Not someone who has 99% chance of being guilty.

Sega9599 posted...

No because this is somebody caught who is 100% guilty. Not someone who has 99% chance of being guilty.

Beside the point. If we're allowing execution to be a punishment, there exists a non zero chance that innocents will be executed. That's not acceptable for a society that claims to be civilized.

People keep engaging with Rune, known troll, suspended multiple times, to get this topic up to 7 pages.

Sheiky-Baby posted...

People keep engaging with Rune, known troll, suspended multiple times, to get this topic up to 7 pages.

Better poster than you :)

Vicious_Dios posted...

Pro-death penalty here (and inTexas).

Why did they take their time to prosecute this dude?

Because our constitution guarantees due process for everybody charged with a crime?

thekosmicfool posted...

Beside the point. If we're allowing execution to be a punishment, there exists a non zero chance that innocents will be executed. That's not acceptable for a society that claims to be civilized.

Besides the point. Non zero is 99%. We are talking about 100%.
The logic that "anything can always go wrong" is faulty if restricted to cases where we are 100% certain that the killer is guilty, not 99.999999 certain, then it is a ZERO chance of it being wrong.

And even if it WAS a non zero 99.999999 chance of being faulty. That is virtually 0% practically because it would not be used in cases of 'simple' murder.

Not to mention our society tolerates non zero chance of wrongful death in many ways. You've got basically a 0 chance of a plane crashing. We decide as a democratic society to tolerate that non zero chance that works out to mean 0 on a day to day basis, and execution cases should be even more impossible to get 'wrong'. Like finding two snowflakes the same. That level of non zero is practically zero, and if tolerated by a democratic society, will be one that I agree with.

Sega9599 posted...

Besides the point. Non zero is 99%. We are talking about 100%.

No we aren't because we aren't just talking about this case. If you allow for it here then you allow for it elsewhere.

People having the freedom to choose to fly in planes knowing the risk isn't comparable to deciding to let the government execute its citizens based on "no, really, we're 100% sure they did it and we'll get it right EVERY time! Promise!"