How to prevent massacre incidents?

[Jimmi]

I never said she was innocent
I said "Wrongly Convicted"

fact she supposedly stabbed him 27 times,
(if not false testimony) tells me
she was scared to death of him coming back.
at least in my mind he apparently drove her to this.

People need to be driven to this much fear & hate

Jeff! She stabbed him 30
times , sliced his throat, and shot him in the head! What does someone have to do to be guilty?? A terrified person wouldn't stay there and mutilate somebody ... They'd stab once maybe twice and run. That kind of mutilation was anger . Warped and twisted anger. That wasnt the actions of a woman scared for her life. And " driven to hate" as an excuse? If she isn't considered guilty than Jack The Ripper is innocent too.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[Bum Luck]

Please tell me you were joking about her being innocent

She reminds me of my ex-wife.

Seriously.

 

[jeff of pa]

Jeff! She stabbed him 30
times , sliced his throat, and shot him in the head! What does someone have to do to be guilty?? A terrified person wouldn't stay there and mutilate somebody ... They'd stab once maybe twice and run. That kind of mutilation was anger . Warped and twisted anger. That wasnt the actions of a woman scared for her life. And " driven to hate" as an excuse? If she isn't considered guilty than Jack The Ripper is innocent too.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion.

As for "Jack", never met him so don't know if he was guilty or not

but for some reason I think I heard the killer wasn't named "Jack"
so i would have to say yes "Jack" most likely was innocent
as for all members of the local Constabulary

 

[Bum Luck]

Wow.

Here's a list of "causes" posted by otherwise folks I've come to think a lot of:

- bleeding heart liberalism

- drugs

- fear

- Technology and the media

- Too many people now days depend on too many others for everything.

- WE have created a society in which the lazy and worthless are paid

- freedom of religion and speech

- foreign aid

- I'm not sure what the answer is though, but laws & legislation aren't it

- lack of morals

- Man brought evil to Earth and it'll continue till we are extinct.

For part of the problem, how about reinstating personal responsibility (thanks dieselram)? Who among us would commit a crime in Mexico or China? Not me. I don't care what you believe, just don't take it seriously enough to do it to me. Or other of your fellow citizens.

A belief system is just that, as Nietzsche points out. Mine, yours, whatever. You have the freedom to believe what you want. The system of Law is a system Civilization needs to survive. The alternative (chaos and anarchy) is not an option. You can't (and shouldn't) regulate belief, but we must regulate behavior, especially sociopathic and psychopathic behavior.

If society sends the wrong signals and does the wrong thing, it cannot expect to be around long.

For my part, I think that tough punishment is not only OK, but necessary. And everyone here, regardless of faith or belief is subject to Law and punishment if those laws are broken.

A lot of you had some really good ideas in line with that. I have to admit that Jack Ryan had a point when he said, "You just can't fix EVERYTHING, but you sure can eliminate ALL the repeat offenders." It's hard for me to reconcile a ruthless serial killer living a long life out in prison (with the possibility of parole) after he brutally takes innocent lives and ruins families.

 

[dieselram94]

Wow.

Here's a list of "causes" posted by otherwise folks I've come to think a lot of:

- bleeding heart liberalism

- drugs

- fear

- Technology and the media

- Too many people now days depend on too many others for everything.

- WE have created a society in which the lazy and worthless are paid

- freedom of religion and speech

- foreign aid

- I'm not sure what the answer is though, but laws & legislation aren't it

- lack of morals

- Man brought evil to Earth and it'll continue till we are extinct.

For part of the problem, how about reinstating personal responsibility (thanks dieselram)? Who among us would commit a crime in Mexico or China? Not me. I don't care what you believe, just don't take it seriously enough to do it to me. Or other of your fellow citizens.

A belief system is just that, as Nietzsche points out. Mine, yours, whatever. You have the freedom to believe what you want. The system of Law is a system Civilization needs to survive. The alternative (chaos and anarchy) is not an option. You can't (and shouldn't) regulate belief, but we must regulate behavior, especially sociopathic and psychopathic behavior.

If society sends the wrong signals and does the wrong thing, it cannot expect to be around long.

For my part, I think that tough punishment is not only OK, but necessary. And everyone here, regardless of faith or belief is subject to Law and punishment if those laws are broken.

A lot of you had some really good ideas in line with that. I have to admit that Jack Ryan had a point when he said, "You just can't fix EVERYTHING, but you sure can eliminate ALL the repeat offenders." It's hard for me to reconcile a ruthless serial killer living a long life out in prison (with the possibility of parole) after he brutally takes innocent lives and ruins families.

Bum Luck, I agree completely with tough punishment. This is not only appropriate but necessary. As far as society sending the wrong signals I believe that is exactly what our society is doing. Again, gun control won't help but rather make things worse...

 

[Jimmi]

Everyone's entitled to their opinion.

As for "Jack", never met him so don't know if he was guilty or not

but for some reason I think I heard the killer wasn't named "Jack"
so i would have to say yes "Jack" most likely was innocent
as for all members of the local Constabulary

Sorry, it just threw me for a loop. I usually agree with most everything you say , so this being so far removed from my thinking shocked me for a minute. Well to be honest , it surprises me anyone believes her. Next time try to
Prepare me when your opinion is gonna differ from mine! Lol

 

[jeff of pa]

Sorry, it just threw me for a loop. I usually agree with most everything you say , so this being so far removed from my thinking shocked me for a minute. Well to be honest , it surprises me anyone believes her. Next time try to
Prepare me when your opinion is gonna differ from mine! Lol

I always take the side of the undrdog.
of course sometimes I have to decide which side is the underdog first.
there is always the chance of being thrown for a loop.

as I said, I have no doubt she killed him, she as much admitted that.
she did screw up by either taking some bad advice or out of fear,
but again even Susan Atkins stopped at 16 stab wounds

only the Insane kill,
but I believe she was Temporarily beyond that point even.
I think she should have been found insane & sent away for Life,
at the most.
but not risk death.
in other words "Wrongly convicted of Premeditated Murder"

 

[Jimmi]

I always take the side of the undrdog.
of course sometimes I have to decide which side is the underdog first.
there is always the chance of being thrown for a loop.

as I said, I have no doubt she killed him, she as much admitted that.
she did screw up by either taking some bad advice or out of fear,
but again even Susan Atkins stopped at 16 stab wounds

only the Insane kill,
but I believe she was Temporarily beyond that point even.
I think she should have been found insane & sent away for Life,
but not risk death.
in other words "Wrongly convicted of Premeditated Murder"

Ok well that makes a little more sense to me now. I thought you were saying she was a victim and was pushed to murder him. If you think she is insane that makes more sense.
Women take horrendous abuse for 3o years and don't murder their spouse . So considering he was just a boyfriend for a brief time , there aint anything he coulda done in that short amount of time to have forced her to kill him. He wasn't holding her hostage, chained in a basement ... There is the door , just walk away.
But yes I agree she had to be insane to do it in the first place, but perhaps even more insane to sit there in that courtroom and claim to be the victim.

 

[jeff of pa]

pushed to murder him ? Yes I did mean that.
I'd wager she didn't wake up one morning & decide to do it for kicks.
Something in Him & her pushed her to do it.
but that's the whole thing. What was it ?
what created that much Hate & fear ?

I agree There was a door to walk away, but the insane don't realize that.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Enough "buttons" get pushed a lot of people just snap, they see red and don't realize what they are doing till it is over.. In the heat of combat it happens to some soldiers, for them it is survival mode....

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[Jimmi]

But they are in a war situation which makes their overkill , still awful, but at least understandable. She was cold blooded

 

[Bum Luck]

Are you guys serious? With statements like this, no wonder people across the country are running amok killing others. This is not OK.

She's not insane, just a cold-blooded and vicious killer. It took the jury just 3 hours to figure that out. Now they decide what to do with her.

What should society do? Jeff? TH? Wanna weigh in?

 

[Whatacoin]

There is no REAL solution. There are many answers but not a solution. I was in Newtown at the time of the shooting and what I have to say is that the US media goes overboard on these things. They harass everyone in town when all they want is to be left alone. On top of this publicizing these things cause others to crawl out of the woodwork.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Are you guys serious? With statements like this, no wonder people across the country are running amok killing others. This is not OK.

She's not insane, just a cold-blooded and vicious killer. It took the jury just 3 hours to figure that out. Now they decide what to do with her.

What should society do? Jeff? TH? Wanna weigh in?

I believe in the death sentence. Also believe if not given death then it should be life at hard labor. I do not believe in how current prisons are ran , should be making little rocks out of big rocks, move this pile of boulders to other side of prison and tomorrow move it back. No TV, no radio, no weights or sports equipment unless swinging a sledge hammer is considered a sport.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[jeff of pa]

Are you guys serious? With statements like this, no wonder people across the country are running amok killing others. This is not OK.

She's not insane, just a cold-blooded and vicious killer. It took the jury just 3 hours to figure that out. Now they decide what to do with her.

What should society do? Jeff? TH? Wanna weigh in?

So in your world "Sane people" go around Killing each other ?

Sorry I'll stay in my world where people who kill other people
are not all mentally there.
at least not at the time they are doing it.

I don't believe in the death sentence, I don't believe in an Eye for an eye.
If Killing is wrong for one person it is wrong for all.

if the person is Vicious & can't be controlled, A cage big enough to crouch in like a Dog
should be sufficient, if the person is a child molester a Box big enough to crouch in is better,
But no. Killing is wrong Period.

In her case at most Life in Prison, as prison life is now.
at least,several years of being obseverd in prison to decide If this was a one time thing. but away from prisoners who may teach her to be a criminal.

no in my world the dangerous don't get "death" the easy way out .

In my world the dangerous know if they get caught, life will be hell,
and short only if they are lucky.

 

[jeff of pa]

Here ya go. a set-up like this




each cage large enough for one person Squatting.
Killers on top, Child Molesters bottom row.

Save money on feeding & upkeep
stack them at Landfills, as trash comes in, it's diner time.
Hose them down twice a day while washing the garbage trucks, if it doesn't rain.
the bottom ones will get washed naturally by the top ones.

Eventually if they all die, cover them over.

How many potential Killers will be weighing their odds of it being worth killing someone ?
How many Potential Child Molesters will weigh their odds of not getting Caught ?

I think it would have a lowering effect on Killings & Molestations.

Of course it would have to be those caught red handed.
No set-ups or errors in court

 

[dieselram94]

Jeff, the human rights groups would never allow that. That being said prison will stay as it is now. To me eye for an eye is fair.

 

[Bum Luck]

So in your world "Sane people" go around Killing each other ?

That is not the same thing. Wherever did you learn logic? Or are you being disingenuous?

In either case, I'm not buying it.

 

[jeff of pa]

That is not the same thing. Wherever did you learn logic? Or are you being disingenuous?

In either case, I'm not buying it.

I'm trying to say this without breaking TNet rules of No religion,
plus I don't got non anyway. and don't wish to insult anyone either.
but No ! I mean what I said.
I do not believe a "sane" person can kill another without being provoked.
(even Self Defense, or protecting a loved one, or self Preservation, during battle)
I believe it's temporary insanity that lets most convince themselves it's ok.
But I still wonder about those who could walk into a room where someone is strapped down,
and kill that defenseless person, and believe it is ok.
I'm Not saying I couldn't be Provoked to do it if I felt I was doing it as revenge,
But I'd probably need Mental Help after. & since I don't trust Shrinks,
and would spend the time questioning their sanity, that wouldn't help.

and I bet you every death row inmate is on suicide watch the night
before their execution.... just so their "fun" isn't ruined
& prison workers are Sane ?
that's Premeditated killing to me

 

[Bum Luck]

I'm trying to say this without breaking TNet rules of No religion,
plus I don't got non anyway. and don't wish to insult anyone either.
but No ! I mean what I said.
I do not believe a "sane" person can kill another without being provoked.
(even Self Defense, or protecting a loved one, or self Preservation, during battle)
I believe it's temporary insanity that lets most convince themselves it's ok.
But I still wonder about those who could walk into a room where someone is strapped down,
and kill that defenseless person, and believe it is ok.
I'm Not saying I couldn't be Provoked to do it if I felt I was doing it as revenge,
But I'd probably need Mental Help after. & since I don't trust Shrinks,
and would spend the time questioning their sanity, that wouldn't help.

and I bet you every death row inmate is on suicide watch the night
before their execution.... just so their "fun" isn't ruined
& prison workers are Sane ?
that's Premeditated killing to me

Well Jeff, I appreciate your attempt to clarify, and I wish I hadn't been as harsh in my reply. It looks as if your stance is a sincere one and there's not enough sincerity these days.


The definition of insanity is NOT "doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." That's actually a dumb saying used a lot to "crutch up" avoidance behavior, and is actually closer to the definition of Perseverance - a desirable trait when used with rational thought. Without rational thought, it's called Perseveration.

There is no listing for Clinical Insanity in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V). It's not really a diagnosis, but more of a layman's term to describe behaviors not like ours. That can lead to difficult definitions, like during the French Revolution - where normal was probably not normal.

Legal Insanity: "mental illness of such a severe nature that a person cannot distinguish fantasy from reality, cannot conduct her/his affairs due to psychosis, or is subject to uncontrollable impulsive behavior." (Law.com) The traditional test of insanity in criminal cases is whether the accused knew "the difference between right and wrong," following the "M'Naughten Rule" from 19th Century England. The Supreme court has held that there is NO Constitutional right to an insanity defense. It is also Constitutional for a State to decide to NOT allow such a defense.


"I do not believe a "sane" person can kill another without being provoked."

I think there's plenty of examples in history of killing done by folks that certainly could tell right from wrong; St. Valentine's Day massacre, Robespierre, Jeffrey Dahmer, Anders Breivik, Dzhokhar & Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the 911 terrorists, and so on through history - millions of examples in fact.

In fact, here's a quote for reflection from Thomas Hobbes, in 1651, but maybe with a lesson for today's sovereign warriors:
"Whatsoever therefore is consequent to a time of Warre, where every man is Enemy to every man; the same is consequent to the time, wherein men live without other security, than what their own strength, and their own invention shall furnish them withall. In such condition, there is no place for Industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain; and consequently no Culture of the Earth; no Navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by Sea; no commodious Building; no Instruments of moving, and removing such things as require much force; no Knowledge of the face of the Earth; no account of Time; no Arts; no Letters; no Society; and which is worst of all, continuall feare, and danger of violent death; And the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short."