Satan has died.

[mtkb]

What is the definition of " be fine with at least the odd innocent person being put to death " I couldn't find that in the dictionary. Also your objective stat on one innocent person being put to death is difficult to reference.

Are you aware of how many innocent people have had their lives taken away because of repeat/released sex offenders? Not just the actual victim, but the families and friends of those. These parents who have had their kids stolen from them are pretty much dead inside. They will never be the same because these freaks get to live and harm more and more people.

What is a fair minded civilization?

Its easy for anyone who hasn't been directly affected by a sexual predator or pedophile to say the death penalty is barbaric. Someone who has had their childs life, mentality, and or soul taken from them would have a better idea of whats barbaric and fair. The notion of your tax dollars paying for food and housing to your sons murderer or daughters rapist is asinine and barbaric to me.

This country is total joke on so many levels of our law.


Father of Kidnapped Son gets Revenge - YouTube

Perhaps you'd prefer to reference Donald Marshall, David Milgaard, or Guy Paul Morin. All would be dead if we had the death penalty. All were proven innocent. Not just "not guilty" because some defense lawyer (like me!) came along and "got them off on a technicality"... innocent. As in, they're even more innocent as you say Olson is guilty.

Please do not lecture me on how letting offenders live has a negative effect on the families of victims. The criminal act is done. Do you really think the families of Olsen's victims have been magically cured of their suffering? Certainly the actual victims havent... Any civilized justice system focusses on what response is needed to deal with the offender - not on how it affects the victims or, by even further extension, the victims friends and family.

You seem to think that victims have enhanced credibility because of what they have gone through. I would argue that is precisely why they must be seen to have less credibility.

You also seem to think that the death penalty should be on the table for people who abuse children. Do you know how many women put their young children up to "daddy touched me" allegations in order to help their custody battles?

I do not shed a tear for Olson. May he rot in hell for an eternity. I also realize there are cases, particularly with the advent of reliable DNA, where proof is 99.99% certain. The problem is that it is impossible to pick and choose the appropriate cases for the death penalty with 100% accuracy. Therefore, no matter what crimes, what level of proof you require, you WILL end up killing innocent men. Frankly I dont care what Olson, Dahmer, Gacy, Bundy, any of em did; its not worth killing someone who has done nothing wrong...

 

[mtkb]

I'm not one to believe in an eye for an eye. Not sure that the answer to death, is more death either. But for gods sake, why do these prisoners get so many rights?
Would it not be logical that you have forgone your rights when you decided to commit a crime? If not, at least after they've been proven guilty of that crime? The fact that prisoners get moved to other areas of prisons "for their safety" is brutal. I'd think that getting shived in prison while some guy whispers in your ear that "this is for the kids you murdered" is better rehabilitation than some psychologist saying "tell me how you feel" every day.

It appears that prisoners have it too good in prison. It's bordering on hotel rather than confinement. Wheres the punishment?

the punishment is being there. is there a prison anywhere you would happily check into even for a weekend stay?

at first blush the "put em in general pop" argument is appealing... the problem is that you're basically guaranteeing that everyone who finishes their time and is released comes out as a raging, psychopathic nutbar... not sure thats the "rehabilitation" society wants or needs...

 

[Tim Berners-Lee]

Perhaps you'd prefer to reference Donald Marshall, David Milgaard, or Guy Paul Morin. All would be dead if we had the death penalty. All were proven innocent. Not just "not guilty" because some defense lawyer (like me!) came along and "got them off on a technicality"... innocent. As in, they're even more innocent as you say Olson is guilty.

Please do not lecture me on how letting offenders live has a negative effect on the families of victims. The criminal act is done. Do you really think the families of Olsen's victims have been magically cured of their suffering? Certainly the actual victims havent... Any civilized justice system focusses on what response is needed to deal with the offender - not on how it affects the victims or, by even further extension, the victims friends and family.

You seem to think that victims have enhanced credibility because of what they have gone through. I would argue that is precisely why they must be seen to have less credibility.

You also seem to think that the death penalty should be on the table for people who abuse children. Do you know how many women put their young children up to "daddy touched me" allegations in order to help their custody battles?

I do not shed a tear for Olson. May he rot in hell for an eternity. I also realize there are cases, particularly with the advent of reliable DNA, where proof is 99.99% certain. The problem is that it is impossible to pick and choose the appropriate cases for the death penalty with 100% accuracy. Therefore, no matter what crimes, what level of proof you require, you WILL end up killing innocent men. Frankly I dont care what Olson, Dahmer, Gacy, Bundy, any of em did; its not worth killing someone who has done nothing wrong...

If Donald Marshall, David Milgaard, or Guy Paul Morin were " more innocent as you say Olson is guilty" ( you suggesting Olsen wasn't guilty?) then thats an entire different argument and legal flaw altogether.

Im not lecturing you. If the idea of closure is foreign to you then they must have lowered the standard on the bar exam.
Waking up each morning knowing your tax dollars are feeding , housing, protecting, education, your childs killer who is still alive would be a lot harder on someone than if the killer was no longer on earth. If you can't see that then you are an idiot.
Serial killers and pedophiles can not be helped and do not deserve a life. End of story.

Well empathy can only get you so far. I do believe a victims family would know what punishment is fair as they are the only ones who truly feel the pain of what a child killer/abuser can cause.


" You also seem to think that the death penalty should be on the table for people who abuse children. Do you know how many women put their young children up to "daddy touched me" allegations in order to help their custody battles? "

Well which fukcing one is it? Sexual assault or perjury? What happened in all these made up cases you " refer " to?

" I do not shed a tear for Olson. May he rot in hell for an eternity. I also realize there are cases, particularly with the advent of reliable DNA, where proof is 99.99% certain. The problem is that it is impossible to pick and choose the appropriate cases for the death penalty with 100% accuracy. Therefore, no matter what crimes, what level of proof you require, you WILL end up killing innocent men. Frankly I dont care what Olson, Dahmer, Gacy, Bundy, any of em did; its not worth killing someone who has done nothing wrong..."

How many peoples lives were terminated , torn apart, abused, stripped and killed because of RELEASED killers, rapists, pedophiles, murderers? In canada the numbers are in the 20,000s . Had these perpetrators been hit with the death penalty for the initial heinous crimes, that number would be dramatically reduced. If a couple lives are falsely terminated to save 20,000 + lives , the death penalty will be saving lives in the long run.

" Frankly I dont care what Olson, Dahmer, Gacy, Bundy, any of em did; its not worth killing someone who has done nothing wrong.."




No way in hell you are a real lawyer

 

[mtkb]

I figured you would twist that into suggesting I believe Olson to be innocent. Reference the "may he rot in hell" further on in my posting. My point was that the three I mentioned are just as innocent as Olson is guilty. If we had the death penalty they'd all be dead...

Fairness in sentencing is not an eye for an eye. Fairness in sentencing is assessing what society ought to do to an individual offender, bearing in mind the sentencing principles that parliament has put into the criminal code... Oddly, vengeance isnt one of them - although, given some time and some more omnibus bills, I wouldnt put it past our little Albertan dictator...

Although you will not believe this, murders and (some) rapists actually have the lowest rates of recidivism among criminals. Yes, there are the Clifford Olson's, and yes, there are serial rapists and sexual sadists of one form or another who can't be cured and should probably be involuntarily castrated (bet you didnt expect that one from me)... but for the most part its not those groups who constantly reoffend. Thats the criminology degree coming in handy, btw...

Listen to yourself, and consider your logic. Why not kill everyone convicted of a crime? That way, they wont victimize anyone again. Rubbish. And incidentally, the US puts murders to death and has for decades. Their murder rate is stupid high relative to the rest of the western world. The presence of the death penalty would seem to have the exact opposite effect to that which you claim. Why? Because any state with the death penalty is telling its citizens that in the right circumstances killing is ok...

Finally, your comment about a couple of lives being terminated to save 20,000 lives is simply morally repugnant. If you believe that, then you are a scary, scary individual... Our system is based on the belief that its better for ten guilty men to go free than it is for one innocent man to be convicted. You'd up the ante and sign off on murdering innocent people. Disgusting.

PS - law degree from UBC in May of 2002, at the age of 22... called in May of 2003... I was going to offer my real name so you could verify it, but given your radical views, I think I'll pass...

 

[Dude]

Bottom line is this: if we as a society could figure out a way to terminate those like Olsen (and IMO, sex offenders in general, murderers or not) after irrefutable proof of their guilt, at a cost that is equal or less than the cost to jail and care for them for the rest of their lives, society would be a better place.

A cynical person may say one way would be to kill all the lawyers first, so they could no longer paint clear black and white lines that shady gray the line so much- but not I.

 

[Dude]

BTW, I am not a real lawyer, but I do play one on TV.

 

[mtkb]

agreed, and I dont suggest for a second that lawyers or anyone has a take on this that is more worthy than the next guy... its a worthy philosophical debate; the problem is that people on the no side invariably are seen as sticking up for the absolute skidmark nuclear waste of society...

 

[djones]

In a thread about a scum like Olsen where people in this forum know someone personally affected by it and seen their lives robbed of peace and happiness, it sounds like you are sticking up for him.

mtkb, I know you and know you're truly not but I don't think this is not the thread to play devils advocate.

 

[mtkb]

I have a good friend who's sister barely escaped being one of Olson's many victims... the problem is that when people use the most heinous example - him - to advocate for the death penalty, their point takes on even greater superficial appeal that needs to be answered... I'm not playing devil's advocate, I wholeheartedly believe that the death penalty can never be justified...

 

[djones]

Fair enough and I think your point is made.