Norway Killer gets 21-Years

[shoju]

You make it sound too simple.

No, It's not too simple. People just don't like it being this simple.

Let's take the case Breivik; maybe 99% of the Norwegian people would be in favor of giving him the death penalty. But what about other murders, and where do you draw the line? 95 % agreement? 75 %? or just a simple 'more than 50%? And who makes the decision where to draw the line?

You shouldn't leave it up to the populace. It should be left up to those who are elected, or placed, in a position to oversee these things.

You are making a choice between revenge on a single person and throwing away all ethics of a whole society. Because that is what it is all about; revenge. I mean giving death penalty's in such cases is not putting other nutcases of committing such a crime right? Of course it is indeed also a lot cheaper just to kill this guy.....very true....but do you want to make this choice based on money?

No. It isn't about revenge. It's about two things.

1.) What to do with a person who committed terrible crimes
2.) The amount of money it takes to house a person that commits these terrible crimes.

I don't want him dead as some sort of "revenge" for the fact that he murdered 77 people, simply because they didn't align with his world view.

I think that the death penalty should be used, because this guy, who did slaughter 77 people, isn't remorseful. He isn't insane. He isn't going to be "Rehabilitated", he isn't going to rejoin society as a "changed" man at some point.

Which means, that for him to be incarcerated, he is going to be in a 3 room prison cell, sucking up a vast sum of money, and manhours, that are better spent elsewhere. If I thought that he was mentally ill, or that he could be "rehabilitated", I would be all for it. But, I just don't see it.

The Death Penalty is no more "Revenge" on him, than sentencing him to a punishment that will (hopefully) end up as life without parole. The Death Penalty (if handled by my suggestion), just costs a significantly smaller portion of the governemnt/taxpayer's money.

Of course besides ethics there is another disadvantage of a very severe punishment system. The prison system in the US for example makes big criminals from small criminals. And makes small criminals from people put away for smoking some weed. Further getting a death penalty is far more dependent on the type of lawyer you can afford than on the crime you committed.

What? I don't know of anyone who has "sold some weed" who is up for the death penalty, or in jail for a long time. Christ, My son's mother

1.) Ran a Crack House (including the manufacture of Crack Cocaine)
2.) Sold Crack Cocaine
3.) Was caught with over 1lb total weight in Marijuana over the course of 3 arrests
4.) Was caught attempting to shoplift $500 in items used in the manufacture of illegal "street drugs"
5.) Stole $50+ in Gasoline (on foot)
6.) Failed to take care of her children resulting in charges of Child Endangerment

(these are the highlights, the rap sheet is oh so much longer)

And, Her lawyer was a Public Defender.... Not necessarily the.... "creme de la creme" of legal counsel in the US.

And still spent a grand total of just 18 months in Jail / Prison. Most of the Jail Time? Tacked on because the second time she was in Jail they rang up most of the charges twice. Once as the Charge, and once as a count of Probation Violation.

They couldn't even keep her in jail after she was arrested the first time. She posted bail, and went on about her merry way committing more crimes, getting arrested, and posting bail again. I have a hard time believing that the US Prison System is what makes them "Bigger" Criminals.

Even in a state like texas, who uses the Death Penalty the most, It isn't used for things like "smoking weed" or for some small crime. The death penalty is sought and used in cases involving the death of other individuals, done with some sort of premeditation, or purpose. We aren't even talking vehicular manslaughter / homicide because you were drunk.

Here there is of course a big difference in thinking between the USA and Europe, something that we will not solve here on the lounge.

Maybe. I just don't see spending 10's of thousands every year to incarcerate someone who knowingly planned the deaths of a large amount of people, because of his world views.

Sovereign states are still sovereign. They cannot credibly prevent themselves from using the death penalty. If Norway wanted to pass a law that this particular guy should be killed, there's nothing to stop them, unless some other country wants to invade over it.

Every country always has the option. The question is, who exercises it?

-Jester

Sure, they have the "Option" of passing a law, but really.... Is that how it should be handled?

I'm not saying that the US Death Penalty is the answer. I'm not. But I'm also saying that not having "some sort" of system by which you can decide to use the death penalty in cases isn't the answer either.

I'd rather the government didn't have the power to kill it's citizens. Mistakes happen, and also abuse of power. There are sensational aberrations, like this case, which give one pause. But, justice means they get an appropriate punishment. There is little hope for rehabilitation, so this guy is just warehoused human garbage.

Of course mistakes happen, of course there can be abuses of power. It's one of the reasons that I'm not in favor of the Death Penalty as currently legislated in the US either.

This, is the type of case, Timothy McVeigh, Jeffrey Dahmer, These cases where there is no debate, there is no question, These "Sensational Aberrations" as you called them.

Even adding "chain gang" or "hard labor" give the state too much power to abuse it's citizens. It says more about us as a society that we don't kill the killers.

Why? What should they do? Sit there? Do NOTHING?

And I'm confused. Are you saying that it somehow says something "better" about us because we don't kill the killers? That we are somehow... a "better" society, because we stuff the killers in a concrete cell, behind razor wire, in a hole with armed guards? That makes us a better society?

Minnesota is more like what Deebye described. Violent sociopaths get life long prison terms with little hope of release in their lifetimes. Sexual predators get civilly committed, and so they don't get free ever, unless they serve their lengthy sentence and convince a panel of psychiatrists they are safe to release.

That doesn't make us any better than using the death penalty. Life in Prison without the possibility of Parole, or some such "sentence" feels the same to me as "skeletons in the closet" that we don't want anyone to know about, or see.