Clifford Olson dies

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Yamer

To explain my comment further, I don't take pleasure or satisfaction from the suffering and death of anyone or anything. That sure is easy to say from the distanced view involving no victimage, but it is truly how I feel.

It's not like I believe people who celebrate the death and suffering of certain individuals deemed 'evil' are wrong, or bad. I'm definitely not one to judge. It's just thought provoking that people can be so morally driven, and yet completely amoral in situations like this.

Thanks for the civil responses everyone.

Yeah I get what your saying, and I'm usually right there with ya. I think we agree about 90% I also feel that in many circumstances the justice crowd (not talking about posters here, just humans in general) get unduly elated over the suffering or death of someone deemed 'evil' or 'unjust'. It's especially boggling when it's a situation that doesn't really involve them. The suffering of any creature is bad, no matter how useless they appear to us (an ant) or how evil they may be (Hitler). Maybe death is preferable, especially if the person still is a threat, like a warlord, or a murderer killed in self defense, but that leap to enjoying the fact that they may have suffered is still unpalatable. Irresponsible. However, in this specific case (and probably the Hitler case, lol) it's just so horrific I don't really care. We all suffer. That's just life. And many MANY others have had cancer. Tons I never think about because I don't know them. So for me to be worried about his suffering at the end of the day, knowing what I know about him, seems a like a disservice both to other people who have cancer, and to his victims.

Now I know being worried about ones suffering and openly being excited about it are two different things, but their degrees along the same line I would imagine. I'm not excited he suffered at the end (if he did), but I can wholly understand those that were. And in this specific case, and a very few others, I can't say they are wrong. Let them be happy if they want. At the end of the day, both Olson and his victims are dead, and it's doesn't matter to any of them.

If ever anyone DESERVED suffering, this was one of those rare people. Again I'm not advocating it, I wouldn't administer it, but I can't be upset about it or views of it either. I completely understand the way you feel though, as I often do too.

[killer_carlson]

I had a sense of jubulation finding out the ####### died yesterday. I suppose that makes me a bad person in some people's eyes, but it's the truth.

[Barnet Flame]

It's the truth that you're a bad person?

I make you out to be a perfectly normal human being.

[Coys1882]

For the most part I'm against the death penalty but for clear cut cases like him I think 'be the better person' goes out the window.

Nails and screwdrivers into his head all the while asking "do you get it now? Do you understand how much pain and fear you served to innocent people?"

[dirk diggler]

Originally Posted by Dion

One doesn't have to be close to the situation to feel elated he suffered and ultimately died. It brings closure and a sense of justice to the families involved.

sad thing is that he was probably provided better health care than most canadians.. now that is a joke.. good riddance

[CaptainCrunch]

I'm trying to think of a single truly positive thing that's come from his death, and I just can't.

As much as we talk about a sense of closure for the family, him dying really puts him beyond any sense of justice for the families.

I mean the guy was defiant til the end and didn't feel a sense of remorse or humanity.

Its times like this where I do kinda wish that there was a hell, and he's going to be tormented for eternity. And if I go by common Christian theory, when I pass on, at least I'll have a shot at getting my hands on the son of a b%tch

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Our morality includes the concept that evil must be punished. A child is an innocent, and does not deserve such suffering so people become sickened by what Olsen did. Consequently, Olsen becomes viewed as evil, and so his own suffering is viewed as just. Ultimately, this is not a morality tale, as one would have to view Olsen of being human for morality to enter the picture.

In this case the definition of human would be subjective. IMO, he was a human being. Fundamentally biologically the same as everyone else, formed by unique experiences and interpretations.

I don't think evil should be punished, but it should certainly be stopped. 'Innocent' is also a subjective term. If he did the same thing to grown men, women, or transgendered people would they not be equally 'innocent', and generate the same contempt for Olsen's actions?

Originally Posted by Dion

One doesn't have to be close to the situation to feel elated he suffered and ultimately died. It brings closure and a sense of justice to the families involved.

It's the being elated part that is intriguing. The only comfort I can get from this situation is that the families of the victims may have received some sort of closure and a sense of peace. It's unfortunate, IMO, that it had to come at the hands of further suffering, pain, and death.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by Coys1882

For the most part I'm against the death penalty but for clear cut cases like him I think 'be the better person' goes out the window.

Nails and screwdrivers into his head all the while asking "do you get it now? Do you understand how much pain and fear you served to innocent people?"

I believe he knew exactly what he was doing, and understood it's implications. In my world, that is the definition of evil. Making him feel what he made those children feel wouldn't make him remorseful or bring new light of understanding to him. From the little knowledge I have of the crimes, case, and studies he seems like the truest form of sociopath that we can comprehend.

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by Yamer

I believe he knew exactly what he was doing, and understood it's implications. In my world, that is the definition of evil. Making him feel what he made those children feel wouldn't make him remorseful or bring new light of understanding to him. From the little knowledge I have of the crimes, case, and studies he seems like the truest form of sociopath that we can comprehend.

You could be right, it's worth a crack.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Yamer

In this case the definition of human would be subjective. IMO, he was a human being. Fundamentally biologically the same as everyone else, formed by unique experiences and interpretations.

the only thing that he shared with someone like me is internal organs and biological functions. But everything that separates human's from true predators that kill for a thrill, he didn't have, so while he was biologically human, he wasn't human, he was a evil corrupt thing.

Clifford Olson was tested pre trial and post sentencing and he was aware of what he was doing, he wasn't insane or crazy, he was aware, that makes him truly evil, you're not going to fix him so get him out of society.

Originally Posted by Yamer

I don't think evil should be punished, but it should certainly be stopped. 'Innocent' is also a subjective term. If he did the same thing to grown men, women, or transgendered people would they not be equally 'innocent', and generate the same contempt for Olsen's actions?

Evil has to be punished or there's no stopping people from committing evil acts, there has to be consequences to your actions, and in the case of Olson where he continued to commit repulsive acts of evil after he was caught for pleasure, to be frank, you're not going to prevent that or stop it, thats the way truly evil people get their emotional release. The same with sexual criminals like pedophiles and serial rapists who not only have to steal innocence but have to establish dominance. There's no fixing those people, so you either have to punish or remove them from being able to commit evil acts.

And innocent is not subjective. If he had raped and murdered the groups that you talk about above the societal revulsion to those acts would be on a high level. And just as these kids were innocent because they had committed no evil and didn't deserve to be victims those transgendered or gays or etc who committed nothing to deserve that fate would be innocent victims.







[QUOTE=Yamer;3303906It's the being elated part that is intriguing. The only comfort I can get from this situation is that the families of the victims may have received some sort of closure and a sense of peace. It's unfortunate, IMO, that it had to come at the hands of further suffering, pain, and death.[/QUOTE]

The families are not going to get any closure or peace, they're probably going to feel some relief, but they still have to wake up every morning without their kids, they still have to feel the guilt that there might have been something that they could have done to prevent it.

And they might feel some satisfaction if they believe in an after life.

Society feels relief and joy because Clifford Olson is dead and there might have been some sense of justice related to a horrible death.

But Clifford Olson like a Ted Bundy like a Saddam Hussien like a Stalin, a Mao and other monsters can't be fixed, and they can't be prevented unless you believe in pre emtive sentencing.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

the only thing that he shared with someone like me is internal organs and biological functions. But everything that separates human's from true predators that kill for a thrill, he didn't have, so while he was biologically human, he wasn't human, he was a evil corrupt thing.

And that is your definition of a human being. My difference would be to say that he was human, but not humane.

Clifford Olson was tested pre trial and post sentencing and he was aware of what he was doing, he wasn't insane or crazy, he was aware, that makes him truly evil, you're not going to fix him so get him out of society.

I agree with your definition of evil. He knew the pain he was causing and its consequences. You do need to separate that kind of evil from society.

Evil has to be punished or there's no stopping people from committing evil acts, there has to be consequences to your actions, and in the case of Olson where he continued to commit repulsive acts of evil after he was caught for pleasure, to be frank, you're not going to prevent that or stop it, thats the way truly evil people get their emotional release. The same with sexual criminals like pedophiles and serial rapists who not only have to steal innocence but have to establish dominance. There's no fixing those people, so you either have to punish or remove them from being able to commit evil acts.

So why punish evil if, as you say, evil people will continue to be evil regardless? Maybe I contradict myself a bit by saying evil doesn't need to be 'punished' but then stating that it should be stopped. Locking a person away from society is a form of punishment to some people, even if you don't beat them, work them to the bone, and/or execute them.

And innocent is not subjective. If he had raped and murdered the groups that you talk about above the societal revulsion to those acts would be on a high level. And just as these kids were innocent because they had committed no evil and didn't deserve to be victims those transgendered or gays or etc who committed nothing to deserve that fate would be innocent victims.

So you are of the opinion that 'innocent' people, no matter age, creed, or color would invoke the same kind of repulsion? I think I understood you correctly. I would disagree. A homeless Black or Hispanic (I realize I am just now introducing race and culture into the conversation, apologies) man sodomized and tortured would probably not generate the same kind of sympathy a Caucasian child who suffered the same fate would. Yet both are equally undeserving of that kind of treatment.

Also, innocent is absolutely subjective. My perception and interpretation of what is defined as innocent differs from what someone else may see as innocent. For example, some religious groups and individuals would call me a sinner for waxing my carrot while fantasizing about the neighbor lady. I'm far from innocent in their eyes.

Two young boys, 10 and 11 years old, from my hometown recently set 4 fires around the community. They burned one home to the ground with a man asleep inside (thankfully he made it out unharmed). They may or may not have been able to fully comprehend the consequences of their actions, but I don't believe these two kids to be 'innocent'...so even the phrase 'children are innocent' isn't a universal concept applicable to every child in the world.

The families are not going to get any closure or peace, they're probably going to feel some relief, but they still have to wake up every morning without their kids, they still have to feel the guilt that there might have been something that they could have done to prevent it.

And they might feel some satisfaction if they believe in an after life.

Perhaps they are more likely to feel a sense of closure rather than peace. The monster is dead. It's hard to tell how this will affect them. The thought that they may feel any kind of relief is the only possible bright spot in this situation.

Society feels relief and joy because Clifford Olson is dead and there might have been some sense of justice related to a horrible death.

But Clifford Olson like a Ted Bundy like a Saddam Hussien like a Stalin, a Mao and other monsters can't be fixed, and they can't be prevented unless you believe in pre emtive sentencing.

Which I don't, because it is absurd. You can't convict someone of something you think they may or may not do. If you have the knowledge and the resources to prevent certain negative situations, it doesn't seem logical to not take action...but I am unsure if I believe you are morally responsible to.

The justice complex in people, whether it be from societal or biological influences, is fascinating. Why do we always feel we need to 'right a wrong'? Is it a need for equilibrium? If so, why doesn't the thought of a status quo compel us to simply return to it rather than feel the need for revenge? And why do we then glorify it, even when pain and death (which are normally considered horrible and terrible things) are involved?

People are strange.