Giving Serial Killers Day Parole

[Sebastian]

Btw, there are very few countries I recognize as democratic.

such as?

 

[Jurhum]

^ Iraq.

 

[THA WILD]

Why should a man, convicted of killing over a dozen women, have the right to leave prison for any reason? And, I don't want to begin to hear this crap about compassion, and so forth, when that guy forefeited his right to visit anyone for any reason the second he was convicted for his killing spree.

 

[Jurhum]

^ Thank you. My thoughts exactly.

 

[Amara]

Deny criminals rights of any kind?

That's an interesting point. I agree with you in the sense that, whilst criminals have taken action which warrants the taking away of some rights, imprisonment is not designed to devoid them of all their rights as human beings.

Yet, prison is, in essence, the taking away ones right to liberty or freedom for a designated period. This man has committed acts which enable the state to deny his release in society. Therefore, there is no obligation to release him under any circumstances, even under compassionate circumstances. Even if dangers are reduced by constant monitoring etc, does legal principle trump morality?

 

[Illuminattile]

that guy forefeited his right to visit anyone for any reason the second he was convicted for his killing spree.

Doesn't his sister have the right to see her brother one last time before she dies?

 

[Bina]

Doesn't his sister have the right to see her brother one last time before she dies?

Like the brothers and sisters of the victims- they never had the chance to see them one last time- coz he took that right away, by killing the women.

This is a hard one- i would like to say show compasion towards him and let him see his sister - but then again, an eye for eye- what he did was evil, he didn't kill one woman by mistake, he went out determined to kill these women on several occasions- so no, show no compassion!!

 

[k69atie]

I don't think he should be allowed out to see his sister, was bad enough they let him out to visit the spot where his dads ashes were scattered!

if he was my brother i wouldnt want to see him, i would have disowned him by now

 

[Illuminattile]

Like the brothers and sisters of the victims- they never had the chance to see them one last time- coz he took that right away, by killing the women.

This is a hard one- i would like to say show compasion towards him and let him see his sister - but then again, an eye for eye- what he did was evil, he didn't kill one woman by mistake, he went out determined to kill these women on several occasions- so no, show no compassion!!

What about his innocent sister, though? She's done nothing wrong, if she wants to see her brother then why deny her that right?

 

[k69atie]

is his sister well enough to go and see him in prison?
Ignore that just re read thread (duh!! lol)

 

[Sebastian]

What about his innocent sister, though? She's done nothing wrong, if she wants to see her brother then why deny her that right?

well..see it this way:

1)she wants to see him, but he doesnt want to see her - then the case is closed anyway
2)she wants to see him and he wants to see her - then he aint got the right to visit her because of what he did

yes, shes the innocent one. but there are two sides. my point of view...

 

[Illuminattile]

well..see it this way:

1)she wants to see him, but he doesnt want to see her - then the case is closed anyway
2)she wants to see him and he wants to see her - then he aint got the right to visit her because of what he did

yes, shes the innocent one. but there are two sides. my point of view...

Matthew Wright brought up this point, which I think kinda swayed me; What if she needs some kind of closure? What if, before she dies, she wants to see her brother to try and find out what turned him into an evil murderer so that she can die without that on her mind?

I see your point, and everyone elses, but my personal opinion is that her rights should not be compromised because of what her brother did.

 

[Sebastian]

Matthew Wright brought up this point, which I think kinda swayed me; What if she needs some kind of closure? What if, before she dies, she wants to see her brother to try and find out what turned him into an evil murderer so that she can die without that on her mind?

I see your point, and everyone elses, but my personal opinion is that her rights should not be compromised because of what her brother did.

like i said before, its a hard decision.
i think u can see it yours or my way. neither the one nor the other is more right or has stronger/better arguments.

 

[k69atie]

Has he ever showed any remorse for the crimes?

 

[Pacaveli-T]

ah by the time this thread is dead with the sister will have already died....

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

^
Here's hoping....

 

[Duke]

I couldn't give a toss for the current idea of deomcracy!

No offence intended towards you Duke but really, 'democratic' countries are doing 'undemocratic' things right, left & centre & usually against the people's will.

I think most people would support a campaign to have certain criminal's rights taken away & thus, my point is that countries could do 'undemocratic' things when actually called for.

Very perceptive. But just because the democrats do undemocratic things makes it right to do so? We have to strive for an ideal, if we would not have an aim for the flawless society, which i don't think we'll ever achieve because Homo Sapiens is crooked, then what would become of us?


But regardless, back on topic.

Yet, prison is, in essence, the taking away ones right to liberty or freedom for a designated period. This man has committed acts which enable the state to deny his release in society. Therefore, there is no obligation to release him under any circumstances, even under compassionate circumstances. Even if dangers are reduced by constant monitoring etc, does legal principle trump morality?

True, there is no obligation. The case should be judged on it's merits instead of a hardline law written for cases such as this.

However, why wouldn't we allow him to see his sister under guard? Because he is a convicted murderer and a fullblown bastard?

That's not an excuse, is it. He can't do any harm when out for only a few hours, under police protection no less.

It's simple vengeance. Resentment. Payback. The man did a bad thing against society, a lot really I wont deny that, and now we're not going to allow this simple thing because we don't like him anymore. What do we have to gain by not allowing it? Hurt the man and his sister? Well, yoohoo. It's not going to bring back the people he murdered. It's not going to sooth the pain of the families whose relatives he killed. It is simply hate. Society's hate against this criminal. Now i'm not saying the man deserves our compassion. Far from it. But to pester him with it, it's so childish really.


We're not supposed to punish criminals. Punishment hardly works. The reason we incarcerate criminals is to protect the innocent against them. Protect society against the criminals. Not punish them. But we want to punish him. We want to punish him so badly. I'm not even gonna front, i'd like to kick his ass just as much as the next guy. But will it help? Will it do something for us? For society? For the victims?


What do we have to gain from denying it? What reason is there to deny it, other than pestering the man because we, as a whole, hate him?

Now you tell me, how childish is that?

 

[Illuminattile]

What do we have to gain by not allowing it? Hurt the man and his sister? Well, yoohoo. It's not going to bring back the people he murdered. It's not going to sooth the pain of the families whose relatives he killed. It is simply hate. Society's hate against this criminal. Now i'm not saying the man deserves our compassion. Far from it. But to pester him with it, it's so childish really.


We're not supposed to punish criminals. Punishment hardly works. The reason we incarcerate criminals is to protect the innocent against them. Protect society against the criminals. Not punish them. But we want to punish him. We want to punish him so badly. I'm not even gonna front, i'd like to kick his ass just as much as the next guy. But will it help? Will it do something for us? For society? For the victims?


What do we have to gain from denying it? What reason is there to deny it, other than pestering the man because we, as a whole, hate him?

Now you tell me, how childish is that?

And what about non-violent criminals, why do we incarcerate them?

 

[Duke]

Because non-violent criminals still dupe society. Someone who commits fraud screwed someone else over financially. A purse thief steals purses and that harms old Elza which in turn is harming society of which old Elza is a part. Same with a car thief. Same with a bank robber. I didn't mean protect literally as in protecting from physical harm. Just protecting from any type of harm.

 

[MX Red]

I agree with Duke - We are not in anyway granting this guy any of his liberties, he will be watched the whole time. To me this has nothing to do with the idea of democracy or its imperfections - its to do with someone wanting to see his sister before she dies, that is a resonable request even for a serial killer since it simply doesnt matter that he is a serial killer, the same emotional attachment is there. The talk of punishment and so on doesnt really have anything to do with this...he wouldnt be let out as some kind of gift, this isnt a reward...his sister is dieing, everyone deserves the right to say there last goodbyes. He wouldnt be let out for a day if his sister wasnt dieing so if he was to be let out it would have nothing to do with his punishment. To me this is a matter of humanity, our humanity - not his!

I accept this is a somewhat contreversial view, but its just the way i see it!
peace
MX!