McVeigh vs Death Penalty

by Amazing 272 Replies latest jw friends

  • jelly
    jelly

    JanH since you know so much about the American Judicial system why dont you tell me how many people were executed in America last year? It must have been thousands to group us with countries like China and Iran. I also noticed you left out Iraq the country that gassed its own people but since they stand opposed to America surely they must be a good country. Really to compare the united states treatment of its citizens with China and Iran is both dishonest and ignorant, if you really believe that I feel sorry for you.
    Jelly

  • crossroads
    crossroads

    Amazing what gave our government the right to cleanse
    the west of the AMERICAN INDIANS didn't WE(our
    forfathers) do this without NO rettrobution. Too bad
    Bosian's didn't have stealth bombers at the time to help
    the poor old indians out. Why not lethally inject Truman
    after all how many innocent lives did he wipe out. The
    war was over we would have NEVER had to invade.
    It was all political so Stallin would see the mighty fire
    crackers we had and would be in fear .Nothing at all
    to do with the innocent Japaneese killed. HMMMMMM
    I guess it all depends on what side of the fence your
    and if you are in power or not.

    I agree with Tina all killing is bad, seems like thats
    the reason I'm having so much trouble with the God
    of the Old Testament.

  • Cowboy
    Cowboy

    I have no problem with the death penalty,whether or not it deters anyone else from commiting the same crime,McVeigh-as someone said earlier-has given up his right to live.He killed each of those people as surely as if he'd shot them point blank,one at a time.I do hate to see him die bacause;1-He will become a martyr to those that share his beliefs,& 2-The truth about who else was involved{I can't believe there weren't more}will die with him.Of course I'm biased-one of those he killed was my 18 month old nephew. {FYI-I'm a third generation JW who left as soon as I was old enough to know better}

  • Englishman
    Englishman

    I think that the way that we feel about the death penalty depends on the society that we have grown up with.

    I know that when my youngest son turned 15 he was suddenly made aware that the US still practised capital punishment. He was astonished and outraged, he thought that all the movies that depicted the death penalty were somehow historic. Although his belief was undoubtedly naive, his innocent reaction was very human.

    Sorry Amazing, I am totally, absolutely against the execution of McVeigh. Society must rise above the need for vengeance of this sort. If we uphold the death penalty we are no better than JW's who reckon that apostates must die at the hand of God, we are just extending the devaluing of human existence shown by the likes of McVeigh.

    Englishman.

    ..... fanaticism masquerading beneath a cloak of reasoned logic.

  • Amazing
    Amazing

    For JanH and others, I will try to make my points a little more clear.

    1. The death penalty is NOT about deterance, revenge, or killing innocent people. The death penalty is about one thing, and one thing only: JUSTICE

    I DO believe that IF there is any doubt about guilt, then it should be held off until absolute 100% proof can be obtained. In McVeigh's case, he PROUDLY admitted guilt. Those who support life in prison as somehow makeing us more civilized have absolutely no damn idea what they are talking about.PRISON is about the most cruel thing you can to another human being. PRISON life is hell and is most UNcivilized, hardens people, and is no deterance to crime IF that is what Amnesty people are looking for. PRISON makes bad people even worse..

    WHAT we need is a major reform of how we treat criminals, what really constitutes CRIME, how to truly REHABILITATE people, and use the death penalty only in those cases where wanton murder was committed, and proof exists to establish guilt.

    Compoaring the USA to China, Iran, Iraq is utterly absurd. Those nations kill at the drop of a hat, and for mere political dissidence. The USA goes to great lengths to provide a fair trial, even at public expense, and makes sure that the convicted has plenty of opportunity to appeal. In Illinois, where recent DNA tests shoed that about 1/3 of the Death Row inmates might not be guilty, the Governor suspended the Death Penalty until the system could be improved. The USA is far and above the likes of nations like China, Iraq, etc.

    What about Crime rate?: As I noted above, the Death penalty is NOT about deterance. But, why does the USA have a high crime rate? It is the socio-moral values that have broken down in the first place. And, IF you have not noticed, CRIME has been on the decline in the country for about 30 years.

    We are also a nation of 280 Million people. There are different dynamics associated with the USA than say a nation with only 10 million where everyone is one race, almost all the same religion, and the life style is not undere so much pressure. The USA is not perfect, but to ban the death penalty will not deter crime, save lives of the victims, or improve the basic values that cause people to live better.

    FINALLY The death penalty DOES save lives and many of them. HARD REALITY here for you who oppose the death penalty. EXAMPLE: There are people, such as Ted Bundy, who kill for sport or some sexual kinky excitement. If not caught, they will kill an average of 300 or more victims in their lives. IS not PRISON then good enough to make society safe? NO

    Here are a few reasons why: These people escape. They influence people on the outside. They kill in the PRISON system. And eventually they get killed. EXAMPLE: Jeff Dahmer, the child molester, killer, and mutilator of little boys died this way in prison after being tortured. So,

    When to anti-death penalty types try to compare this civil act to JWs treatment of apostates, you are straining and strectching, because you do not know or understand in the slightest what you are talking about. I do not question your good motives, but I question how much you really understand hard reality and the facts associated with keeping a person alive in prison.

    As for Myterdom of McVeigh. Nope, it ain't goona happen. Americans have better sense than that. Mcveigh needs to go to sleep peacefully and not wake up. Justice will be served. The rest of us can move on. - Amazing

  • Tina
    Tina

    Morning Amazing,
    I will disagree with your opinion. (edited,because it was an inappropriate conclusion on my part)

    You are correct. There is no rehabiltiation in our prison system.
    And yes life behind bars is terrible, Prisoners suffer everyday.
    Well the survivors and families of their crimes suffer everyday too.
    Poor prisonors. So you think it's better to kill them because their life is so terrible? Utterly ridiculous. WHo puts the survivors out of their 'misery'. The prisoners life of misery is the consequence for the crime they committed,and that's more justice than killing them.

    If our justice system worked like is should life would mean LIFE. And I think many could let go of this 'killing to show that killing is wrong' practice. And rehabilitation isn't going to work on the majority of prisoners anyway. There are studies out there that show a very heavy percentage of the prison population are Anti-social personalities. There is nothing that works with this type.
    You cannot give anyone a conscience and thats what they lack.
    This came out rather strongly,but as a survivor ,but I feel that I also know what Im talking about. Regards,Tina

  • Amazing
    Amazing

    Hi Crossroads: I want to separately address your comments from above.

    You said, "Amazing what gave our government the right to cleanse the west of the AMERICAN INDIANS didn't WE (our
    forfathers) do this without NO rettrobution."

    First, my post was about Mcveigh, and not American history and its treatment of native indians. But, I agree with you on this. Our ancestors were wrong to treat the native indians the way they did. But, if you read history, you will find that it was NOT a one-sided affair where a bunch of mean white guys came over and butchered peace loving kind gentle indians. The issue was far more complex, and many idnian tribes were warriors, who would make alliances with the white settlers so they could buy guns and kill tribes they didn't like.

    The white man prevailed because we out-manned and out-gunned the Indians. But it took from 1492 until about 1892 or 400 years to do this. I am not proud of the serious errors of the my white ancestors, but I am equally not proud of red ancestors who, in many cases, were as guilty of serious wrongs as the whites.

    Most of all, the American government and the overwhelming vast majority of white Americans are 100% against what took place, in spite of red man guilt involved.

    You continued, "Too bad Bosian's didn't have stealth bombers at the time to help the poor old indians out."

    You may forget history here, but there were the French-Indian wars, and similar events where the Idnains were given a lot of help. They were trained in updated warfare, bought guns, and made alliances with other European nations to fight wars. The problem is, they lost. Again, native American Indians were not all peace loving, bead making, gentile little poor spirits. Many were damn butchers who would burn down white settlers homes without warning to move, they would scalp the men, rape the women, and take the children. Were all indians this way? No! Were all white out to gun down Indians? No. It was a complex time in history, and before making solid judgments, one must read a lot of history to get a balanced picture.

    The bad treatment of native indians took place more toward the middle to end of the 19th century where they were confined to reservations, and treaties violated by the USA government. This is the clear tradegy, and one that is still a problem. But today, it is not that indians are confined to the reservations, but they refuse to leave and integrate with white society. I can't judge them for this, because I don't fully understand the dynamics. But, they are keeping themselves down now.

    You said, "Why not lethaly inject Truman after all how many innocent lives did he wipe out."

    If you are speaking of now deceased US President Harry Truman, you are then referring to what? The nuclear bomb droppd on Japan? This is absurd. The Japanese started that war with wanton bombing. Should the USA sit there and say, 'Oh my, we are a peace loving people, and Japan, that was not a nice thing to do. Stop it now!" HELL NO! It was war, and the choices were to either sit back and be killed, or fight back and kill the invaders. As for dropping the bomb, I agree that it was likely not necessary. But, my father who fought in that war in the Pacific, sdaid that the Japanese warriors would never have surrendered so soon, unless the bomb was dropped.

    20 years later, in 1965, I recall news reports of Japanese soldiers found in various islands in and aorund the Phillipians who still thought the war was going on and were in the fighting mode. Japanese were part of a cult religion as well, and that is why they would commit suicide ... komakazies would take off and have their wheel drop off so that they would be sure to die for the empire!

    But, what disturbes me about the bombs dropped on Japan was the harm to children and women who were not involved in the war. But then again, what about the innocent Americans killed at Pearl Harbor when Japan wickedly bombed the hell out of the place, wiped out the US 7th Fleet?

    You continued, "The war was over we would have NEVER had to invade.
    It was all political so Stallin would see the mighty fire crackers we had and would be in fear. Nothing at all to do with the innocent Japaneese killed. HMMMMMM"

    While I agree that dropping the nuclear bombs was not good, I know of no evidence that supports your theory to impress Joe Stalin. The Japanese were fighting to the bitter end, and Truman made a judgment call. It may not have been the best call. But, recall that Truman, during the Korean War, fired Gen McArther because he wanted to contain and end the War, whereas Douglas McArther wanted to invade China and keep going. Truman knew that this war business havd to stop. Enough was enough. So, his judgment to use the nuke bomb on Japan was to bring a swift end to the War, and it worked.

    It is easy for us here 56 years later to see that the bomb was not the best judgment. But, I cannot place myself in his shoes and say what I would do differently.

    You said, "I guess it all depends on what side of the fence your
    and if you are in power or not."

    To some extent. Might does not make right. But might is good to have for those who are right. But the worst thing we can do to ourselves is to rewrite history, and swallow the swill of those who try to make the USA out to be some kind of western version of the Nazis. The USA is far from perfect, but it is still a good nation, made of mostly good people, who try to do good and be friends. Sometimes, the USA stumbles over itself, and sometimes it makes stupid judgments, and sometimes the USA is arrogantly wrong, or at least that is how others perceive us. But we are still a good nation trying to move in the right direction.

    YTou said, "I agree with Tina all killing is bad, seems like thats
    the reason I'm having so much trouble with the God of the Old Testament."

    Killing and murder is bad. I agree. Justice is NOT bad. Ending Mr. McVeigh's life is about JUSTICE and not about killing or murder. That son of a bitch killed woman, babies, fathers, mothers, husbands, wives, brothers, sisters, all in the name of his psychotic ideas. he showed no regard for the lives of these innocent people. He is a brutal murderer. Putting him out of existence is the right thing to do. 168 women, men, and children were killed, and many others injured for life. This is NOT about revenge, it is about JUSTICE!

    I do not want Mr. McVeigh treated cruely by having some lug in prison raping him, by having him beat up day after day by prisoners who feel the need to punish him further. I do not believe that his life in prison will do anyone any good. Let the man die peacefully, and move on. Good riddance to him. - Amazing

  • Amazing
    Amazing

    Hi Tina:

    You said, "I will disagree with your opinion. And that's all it is."

    I accept that.

    You continued, "And I do KNOW. I really didnt think that line was necessary."

    I am not sure what you are referring to.

    You continued, "What makes you know better than anyone else? You may state it more eloqquently but its still just an opinion, just as mine is."

    I never said that I know better than anyone else. I state my view, and noted it as much. I feel strongly about my view, and I am not ashamed of my view. Could I be worng? Yes. And in stating my view, I also have the same right to disagree with others, and debate their view, as that have the right to debate my view. But, I do not place myself above others in doing this. Maybe it is possible that motives and intent were attributed to my post that are not there. This is a problem with the written word without the benefit of mannerisms, facial expressions, and tone of voice.

    Sorry if you feel that I was speaking with any arrogance or a sense of superiority. I speak what I believe and view, but I have no arrogance or superiority. I respect the views of others, including and especially those I disagree with. I do not always enjoy 'preaching to the choir. I welcome healthy debate, and I debate to my best. But I respect others.

    The difference here is that we can have such debates and disagreements, and not wipe each other out as what took place in the WTS. I apologize if I offended you or anyone, as this was not my intent. Hope that we can move forward from here. - Amazing

  • Tina
    Tina

    Hi Amazing,
    No problem. I understand,,this is an emotionally charged issue isn't it? :>
    And I most certainly appreciate your perspective. I apologize for the strong tone that came across and have edited it out of my respect for you. Thanks,Tina

  • mommy
    mommy

    Well since this is one of my favorite subjects, I thought I would pop in. Hey Six, nice to see you

    For the longest time I thought the death penalty was correct, but I saw it as the literal "eye for an eye" If someone stabbed someone 137 times, I felt they should be stabbed 137 times. I figured, if a person is willing to take a life, they should be ready to have their life taken.

    But somewhere along the way, I changed my mind. I grew up and experienced a few things. In my profession I have been invited into many peoples lives. I hear their stories, and try to learn from them. I hear their deepest secrets they will not share even with their family. I saw the raw side of humans and realized how imperfect and fragile we all are.

    There is a very thin line that seperates us all. Some people want to make claims of their perfection (Six) Without ever really opening up the dark side of themselves and seeing that it is there. If you are unwilling to accept this side you will never see the full picture, your view is distorted.

    So then we go to what Amazing brought out, McVeigh did admit to this. Ok so now what? He is injected with a medicine and dies in 2-10 minutes. He never has to think about what he did again(as far as we know) The families of the lost ones, now will be satisfied in their hearts, that the man is dead? Rejoicing that "justice" was served. That seems so inhuman, well, maybe I should say human. I for one can honestly say, I will never rejoice when I see a human die. There is a loss for someone, somewhere when this happens. I could go on and on, but I won't

    This whole scenario reminds me of a scene I saw in the store one day. A mother had two children in the buggy, and The little girl hit the boy on top of the head. The mother then slapped the girls bottom and said, "You are not supposed to hit!"
    wendy

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit