Hussla Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21455558-2,00.html Mass murderer Martin Bryant tried to cut his throat and is on suicide watch..... And why should anyone care? Because we're a society of fools, that's why. Too many bleeding hearts demanding that scum of the Earth are entitled to basic human rights and equal treatment, what bollocks! Let the bastard cut himself all he wants, why anybody care? Instead we should be celebrating his death. Or why doesn't the government in its infinite wisdom just order Bryant to be thrown in among the regular prison population, let him try and survive that one. Why should taxpayer dollars be WASTED on keeping him alive and safe? where is the logic in any of that? Can anybody who gives the case a serious thought find a logical answer as to why him and others like him, rapists, child molesters, et al deserve any sort of fair and humane treatment? whilst their victims and their families continue to suffer. Ask yourselves that before giving any sympathy to the devil.
Austen Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 ***SNIP***And why should anyone care? Because we're a society of fools, that's why. Too many bleeding hearts................. Darn, I've lost my Troll-Horn, I'll have to do it manually....................... Biiiiiiiiteeeeeeeey.... Austen.
mello yello Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Anyone who pushes for the Death Penalty should be SHOT!!!! should we shoot him now or wait till he gets home?
Hussla Posted March 27, 2007 Author Posted March 27, 2007 But it's Martin Bryant...the man who shot up 30 people at Port Arthur!!
mello yello Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 But it's Martin Bryant...the man who shot up 30 people at Port Arthur!! Making it 31 will not bring them back And who could it be one day when the system goes wrong and the wrong guy is in the klink? ...or in the wrong place at the wrong time. We are not vengeful savages I leave Justice to the Lawmakers and Spirituality to God..and he said unambiguosly... "Vengeance is Mine" ..its what makes us civilised and gives us the morality to progress.
Austen Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 But it's Martin Bryant...the man who shot up 30 people at Port Arthur!! Oh........That Martin Bryant <==== Duh winkey. Austen.
mello yello Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Oh........That Martin Bryant <==== Duh winkey.Austen. Who did you think it was Austen?....the guy from the Today Show?
Hussla Posted March 27, 2007 Author Posted March 27, 2007 Making it 31 will not bring them backAnd who could it be one day when the system goes wrong and the wrong guy is in the klink? ...or in the wrong place at the wrong time. We are not vengeful savages I leave Justice to the Lawmakers and Spirituality to God..and he said unambiguosly... "Vengeance is Mine" ..its what makes us civilised and gives us the morality to progress. So what do you propose? we let him out loose in society again? or we just keep him alive at the expense of the Tasmanian Taxpayer when that money could be better spent on schools, healthcare and other services.
mello yello Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 So what do you propose? we let him out loose in society again? or we just keep him alive at the expense of the Tasmanian Taxpayer when that money could be better spent on schools, healthcare and other services. I dont want to debate you ...I just want to shoot you
Groover ! Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 I dont want to debate you...I just want to shoot you :P :P Mello I've said it once and Ill say it again your a funny man.
ibanez5 Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Hey, if he wants to top himself, let him do it. That is what happens to your mental state when you spend many years in solitary confinement.
Steve C Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 I dont want to debate you...I just want to shoot you How salaciously ironic... The best solution for proponents of capital punishment is to enact swift summary 'justice'. Nice... Personally, I think Chris has every right to ask whether those who have abrogated any consideration by society as possessing 'humanity' through their actions, deserve any compunction by that society in their upkeep. Running away from discussing the issue; or ridiculing it, is as bad as tacitly approving of capital punishment by failing to object to it. Justice isn't achieved through the heat of vengeance. It sometimes takes much longer for justice to be attained. As for beings like Mr Bryant... Why waste another life? There's many more things that could be learnt from studying individuals like him. If knowing what to look for in those most likely to commit such offences saves even one single life - then Mr Bryant will have gone some miniscule way to repaying a debt he can never repay. Taking his life sure won't repay it. I don't see anything morally repugnant or distasteful in putting these worst case scenarios of humans gone wrong, under the microscope in an effort to prevent their like repeating the same horror and destruction. Like our precious water resources however, we're more prepared to waste what's right in front of us, rather than make use of it while it's still around; and all for the sake of emotions that the majority can't even quantify. Bloody typical...
DrP Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 should we shoot him now or wait till he gets home? <daffyduck>Shoot him now! Shoot him now!</daffyduck>
OakenShield1 Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 I read somewhere it actually costs more to kill someone (Via Capital punishment) than to keep them alive in a prison for life. As for them killing themselves, I think it's a weak exit. It's much worse for them living life behind bars than dead IMHO.
Mining Man Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 I read somewhere it actually costs more to kill someone (Via Capital punishment) than to keep them alive in a prison for life.~ And you know where all the money ends up in a capital case, don't you? In the pockets of a bunch of lawyers.
Steve C Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 I read somewhere it actually costs more to kill someone (Via Capital punishment) than to keep them alive in a prison for life.As for them killing themselves, I think it's a weak exit. It's much worse for them living life behind bars than dead IMHO. I'm not sure in which country, a single slug between the eyes, costs more than decades of three meals a day and salaried guards - but knowing that there's figures out there that prove Scientology is correct; there's bound to be something... Not so sure about the life behind bars thing either. I was pressured into applying for a couple of prison teaching jobs. The thing that made me decide it wasn't for me was: I'd be working my butt off for a bunch of dudes who get everything served up to them on a plate - including my teaching... and the extra tax I'd pay from working more hours than a TAFE teacher is supposed too would probably go to making their existence behind bars even cushier than what I had already witnessed. I realised that the cleverest thing to do if things get any worse than they are - like if a Howard Government is returned, would be to commit a petty crime such as larceny, or willful damaging of Government property - and get sent to a minimum security facility. It's like living in an extended block of small units with a bunch of guys who generally stick to themselves (like in the 'real' world) with the added attraction that you can choose from various activities that are laid on for everyone and three good meals a day. Some holiday resorts should be as good in value for the 'clients' as many minimum security facilities are. BTW 'clients' is how I was informed the incarcerated gents were to be referred too. They truly are 'Guests of Her Majesty's Penitentiaries'! Maximum security isn't such a cushy ride, but locking the door and throwing away the key is just an admission that we don't have a clue how to deal with either the offender or what brought them to offend. Hoping that offenders like Mr Bryant "do our dirty work for us", may ease the moral pangs of some; but it's an empty form of 'justice' that leaves society still wondering what it was that brought such a person to commit such an atrocity.
Brazzwald Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Feed him to the crocs / sharks / tassie devils... I agree that he shouldn't have the easy option of taking his own life. Brazzwald
aztec Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 Should be like Big Brother, a big boot sqaushing his head into the mud for eternity.
Aloysius Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 The focus should change from the person - ie Bryant. - to the rest of us. All talk of shooting and other punishments is about him. He is an aberration that must be dealt with. But what about society in general - at the minimum they must be protected from this kind of (apparently) remorseless killer. What is the best result for us? Can we expect people to be genuinely reformed by a certain time or removed if not? ie opportunity given for reform that is not open ended. I don't know the answer but there are a lot of aspects to this issue. I do not support capital punishment. Some folks are eager for euthansia to be legalised - do you say "well lets euthanise a terminally (no prospect of recovery)mentally sick person"? Do we regard a remorseless killer as mentally sick?
Austen Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 I read somewhere it actually costs more to kill someone (Via Capital punishment) than to keep them alive in a prison for life.As for them killing themselves, I think it's a weak exit. It's much worse for them living life behind bars than dead IMHO. I'm not sure where I heard this, But I too have heard this, probably in relation to the U.S.A. Say (figure appears from bum) $50,000 per year to keep a prisoner, twenty years is gonna cost you $1,000,000, given that death penalty cases go on for 10-15 years, it's not too hard to see where that sort of figure in legal fees would come from.......... Personally, I do believe in the death penalty for certain crimes. I was talking to my kids about this last weekend (after yet another child abduction attempt) and both of them are vehemently opposed to the death penalty. I told them that as far as I was concerned, if anyone hurt either of them, then someone had to die for that..........They looked at me in a strange sort of way, as if they could almost see my point of view, and then I said to them, "Come back to me when you have kids of your own and tell me then how you feel about the death penalty." There are of course two issues with the death penalty, what are you trying to achieve and what is your margin for error....... In a straight-from-the-heart comment, and one I know is totally out of place with civilised society's thinking, but I would just want vengeance. Pure and simple vengeance. No rehabilitation or deterrence, just vengeance. I do not believe that I would ever find the compassion in my heart to forgive someone who had hurt my family....... Of course, a second option, and one that I'd be (almost) just as happy with, would be where the guilty party was sentenced to "Life In Prison". Where "Life In Prison" meant ummm.....life in prison. No parole..No possibility of parole....no further appeals...and never released. EVER. AT ALL. NO MATTER WHAT. No special trips to see Mum being buried, THE REST OF HIS LIFE.........IN PRISON. But that's just me, YMMV.................... The second issue is of course the margin for error............. As a long time-watcher of Law & Order (Original / CI / SVU / TbJ), I feel fully qualified to comment on the American Legal System, and note (without comment at this stage) that the main difference between our system and the USA system is that in Australia the prosecution "system" is government appointed, whereas in America the prosecution is popularly elected. This may (can ?? does ??) lead to the prosecution team (from lawyers through to judges) feeling public pressure to deliver the "right" verdict as opposed to the "correct" one. This changes (to some degree) when the guilty party is caught holding the smoking gun........... Austen.
Steve C Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 Should be like Big Brother, a big boot sqaushing his head into the mud for eternity. That sounds like an affordable and practical solution... Very similar to the punishment meted out by the God's of Ancient Greece to the Titans. Stuff like being chained onto the ground and having fruit from trees dangle forever just out of reach of hands or mouth, or having an eagle tear the liver from the abdomen every day. Whilst such extremely effective imaginary punishments help ease the angst we feel inside ourselves towards these individuals, they are pure fantasy. Something that isn't fantasy is that there are people living amongst us who could and maybe will commit Martin Bryant style crimes, regardless of any real or imaginary consequences. The death penalty has never brought an end to crimes that demand it be used as the ultimate price. If such a deterent has actually failed to deter; would it not be more fitting for our supposed human intelligence to try and prevent the crimes occuring in the first place? We used to bleed the sick as a cure, despite the outcome of prolonged use of such a practice being universally predictable... bleeding remained the medically accepted practice for eliminating maladies caused by foul humours for centuries. It's taken us centuries to realise bleeding is no cure. Prevention of the disease has far higher success rates. Prevention is enabled through careful study of the organisms that make us ill, and devising a variety of means of dealing with it. Surely the same process is worthy of considering when dealing with the health of a society?
aztec Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 Do you think (or know) that the learnings are actually used in a practical way. Has there ever been an interception of a child so that he can learn proper values, or perhaps be locked up prior to committing a crime
Aloysius Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 That sounds like an affordable and practical solution... Very similar to the punishment meted out by the God's of Ancient Greece to the Titans. Stuff like being chained onto the ground and having fruit from trees dangle forever just out of reach of hands or mouth, or having an eagle tear the liver from the abdomen every day. Whilst such extremely effective imaginary punishments help ease the angst we feel inside ourselves towards these individuals, they are pure fantasy. Something that isn't fantasy is that there are people living amongst us who could and maybe will commit Martin Bryant style crimes, regardless of any real or imaginary consequences. The death penalty has never brought an end to crimes that demand it be used as the ultimate price. If such a deterent has actually failed to deter; would it not be more fitting for our supposed human intelligence to try and prevent the crimes occuring in the first place? We used to bleed the sick as a cure, despite the outcome of prolonged use of such a practice being universally predictable... bleeding remained the medically accepted practice for eliminating maladies caused by foul humours for centuries. It's taken us centuries to realise bleeding is no cure. Prevention of the disease has far higher success rates. Prevention is enabled through careful study of the organisms that make us ill, and devising a variety of means of dealing with it. Surely the same process is worthy of considering when dealing with the health of a society? Some might argue that the reason bleeding didn't help was that it was stopped too soon
Cooksta59 Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 In a straight-from-the-heart comment, and one I know is totally out of place with civilised society's thinking, but I would just want vengeance. Pure and simple vengeance. No rehabilitation or deterrence, just vengeance. I do not believe that I would ever find the compassion in my heart to forgive someone who had hurt my family.......Austen. Well i was not going to enter into this debate but I feel that Austen has hit on one of the most pertinent points of this whole topic. How would you and I react in the aftermath of a terrible situation such as Pt Arthur? Would you be able to "turn the other cheek" as they say? I dont think I could. Cooksta
Thudd1503560234 Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 How would you and I react in the aftermath of a terrible situation such as Pt Arthur?Would you be able to "turn the other cheek" as they say? I dont think I could. I have no doubt that a desire for vengeance would be a an almost universal reaction to personally suffering some extreme loss in that kind of situation. It's a perfectly normal human reaction to want to lash out at those we perceive have wronged us. I imagine I'd feel the same. Doesn't make it right though.
Recommended Posts