Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
If you think that the state shouldn't have the right to execute people with the 'death penalty', and they absolutely shouldnt', then you can't change the rules in a situation like this.
The fact is that the US has screwed up so many times killing innocent people with the death penalty that it simply shouldn't be an option anymore.
Give the guy a fair trial, a good lawyer, and put him through the motions. Change him with everything the law has to offer, and then throw him into a 4x8 cell in a supermax for the rest of his very long life.
Continuing the cycle of violence solves absolutely nothing.
And he has the constitutional right to his Miranda rights. I don't care how much of a scumbag he is, the law is the law and it shouldn't be changed because he committed a bigger atrocity than a guy who murders his wife.
Either we follow the rule of law or we might as well screw liberty, JUSTICE and freedom for all.
|
I don't think I was arguing anything but.
The prosecution should take the death penalty off of the table, that way they could show some mercy to this person, while at the same time not making him a martyr to any cause.
Absolutely give him a fair trial.
If he wants to cooperate, let him cut a deal, because frankly any deal is still going to ensure life in prison with no chance of parole.
I don't know where the circle of violence comes into play, it just seems to me that in this specific case these two perpetrated the circle of violence when they decided that they wanted to bomb ordinary innocent people at a sporting event in a country that seems to have given them every opportunity.
They are reprehensible, and their crime cannot be redeemed, but the American's would be smart not to simply revenge themselves upon the last remaining brother, but allow him to keep his miserable life.
For what it is.