What is a fair punishment for murderers?

[JohnB445]

We have members on here who have various views on whether or not we should have the death penalty.

I will summarize this video
The person in the video murdered an elderly victim, this was unprovoked and completely random
For that crime the judge figured that 8 years would be a sufficient punishment

What do you think of that? Would you feel uncomfortable about a society letting known murderers walk free eventually?

We need to also think here for a moment that since this attack was unprovoked and random, it could have been anybody. And the victim that died was somebody's grandparent.

So I ask all that answers this question to put yourself in the shoes of the grieving family.

 

[Bradskii]

We have members on here who have various views on whether or not we should have the death penalty.

I will summarize this video
The person in the video murdered an elderly victim, this was unprovoked and completely random
For that crime the judge figured that 8 years would be a sufficient punishment

What do you think of that? Would you feel uncomfortable about a society letting known murderers walk free eventually?

We need to also think here for a moment that since this attack was unprovoked and random, it could have been anybody. And the victim that died was somebody's grandparent.

So I ask all that answers this question to put yourself in the shoes of the grieving family.

It was manslaughter, not murder. First degree murder is done with the intention to kill, done wilfully with premeditation and malice aforethought. Second degree is the same without premeditation. Manslaughter means that there was no intent to kill.

If I were the woman's family I'd consider it a fair punishment for a criminal act that had a tragic but unintended consequence.

 

[FireDragon76]

It was manslaughter, not murder. First degree murder is done with the intention to kill, done wilfully with premeditation and malice aforethought. Second degree is the same without premeditation. Manslaughter means that there was no intent to kill.

If I were the woman's family I'd consider it a fair punishment for a criminal act that had a tragic but unintended consequence.

I agree. It's a despicable crime, but in the US, murder has specific definitions, and it has to include premeditation to some degree.

Elderly people are often frail and she probably wasn't aware of that. She'll have time in prison to contemplate what she has done. New York prisons are no picnic.

 

[Occams Barber]

We have members on here who have various views on whether or not we should have the death penalty.

I will summarize this video
The person in the video murdered an elderly victim, this was unprovoked and completely random
For that crime the judge figured that 8 years would be a sufficient punishment

What do you think of that? Would you feel uncomfortable about a society letting known murderers walk free eventually?

We need to also think here for a moment that since this attack was unprovoked and random, it could have been anybody. And the victim that died was somebody's grandparent.

So I ask all that answers this question to put yourself in the shoes of the grieving family.

We need to differentiate between justice and revenge. For this reason a justice system should never "put itself in the shoes of the grieving family".

While it should never ignore the harm done by the perpetrators the sentence imposed needs to be based on a clear-headed appreciation of the nature of crime, punishment and justice.

In a reasonable society justice is not revenge.

OB

 

[Hvizsgyak]

Murder (premeditated) is a absolutely disgusting act on another person. The victim never fully was able to live out God's plan for himself/herself. Now apply that same logic to the murderer. God will judge that person and sentence him/her according to what God sees fit. Only God knows what's in the heart and mind of each person when he/she commits a sin. I know this does not bring solace to many of the victim's family. It's a horrible feeling having someone taken away from you (in our eyes) prematurely. Bitterness is inevitable and the victim's family has every right to feel the way they do and for however long they want. But just to feel and not to act on those bitter feelings in a negative way. God heals ALL wounds.

 

[FireDragon76]

We need to differentiate between justice and revenge. For this reason a justice system should never "put itself in the shoes of the grieving family".

While it should never ignore the harm done by the perpetrators the sentence imposed needs to be based on a clear-headed appreciation of the nature of crime, punishment and justice.

In a reasonable society justice is not revenge.

OB

Society has every right to express collective disgust at crime. In our country, retribution is still accepted as a valid reason to punish crime. But retributive impulses must also be kept within the constraints of law, they must be proportionate to the crime, and not be arbitrary.

 

[Occams Barber]

Society has every right to express collective disgust at crime. In our country, retribution is still accepted as a valid reason to punish crime. But retributive impulses must also be kept within the constraints of law, they must be proportionate to the crime, and not be arbitrary.

There are at least five recognized purposes attributed to criminal sentencing: deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, retribution, and restitution.

Placing oneself in "the shoes of the grieving family", as suggested by the OP, places undue emphasis on retribution and an 'eye for an eye' mentality.

This is why sentencing is normally determined by impartial judges and not the jury or the aggrieved party.

OB

 

[FireDragon76]

There are at least five recognized purposes attributed to criminal sentencing: deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, retribution, and restitution.

Placing oneself in "the shoes of the grieving family", as suggested by the OP, places undue emphasis on retribution and an 'eye for an eye' mentality.

An eye for an eye is one measure of justice. In fact that notion has long played a role in the western legal tradition. It means the punishment should be proportional to the crime.

Taking into account the grief of the family is relevant in sentencing, at least in the United States. It's part of accounting for the damage done to society as a whole.

 

[Robban]

We have members on here who have various views on whether or not we should have the death penalty.

I will summarize this video
The person in the video murdered an elderly victim, this was unprovoked and completely random
For that crime the judge figured that 8 years would be a sufficient punishment

What do you think of that? Would you feel uncomfortable about a society letting known murderers walk free eventually?

We need to also think here for a moment that since this attack was unprovoked and random, it could have been anybody. And the victim that died was somebody's grandparent.

So I ask all that answers this question to put yourself in the shoes of the grieving family.

Some time ago an American woman drove out of an airport in the UK,

onto the wrong side of the road, collided with a motorcyklist and he died-

Anyone know what happened to her?

 

[Lukaris]

I have to say that I cannot support the death penalty. A major emerging problem, I believe, is that there is a mindset that does not even support necessary incarceration. There seem to be appropriate psychological, not physical, punishments that could be applied to necessarily punish, & hopefully redeem, murderers.

 

[Whyayeman]

Some time ago an American woman drove out of an airport in the UK,

onto the wrong side of the road, collided with a motorcyklist and he died-

Anyone know what happened to her?

Yes. Anne Sacoolas, the wife of an Air Force Officer, immediately left the country. The case dragged on with the woman hiding behind her husband's diplomatic role until finally she pleaded guilty and was given an eight month suspended sentence for manslaughter. she has not returned to the UK.

 

[Whyayeman]

I have to say that I cannot support the death penalty. A major emerging problem, I believe, is that there is a mindset that does not even support necessary incarceration. There seem to be appropriate psychological, not physical, punishments that could be applied to necessarily punish, & hopefully redeem, murderers.

I agree. We have just had the conclusion of the trial of a nurse found guilty of the murders and attempted murders of new-born babies in a neo-natal unit here. She was given a whole-life tariff. She will never be released.

I think there is a widespread feeling that this is appropriate. The death penalty for murder was abolished here fifty-odd years ago. There is very little pressure to restore it.

As for punishment - the loss of liberty is the punishment. It serves a second purpose - the safety of the public.

 

[Robban]

Yes. Anne Sacoolas, the wife of an Air Force Officer, immediately left the country. The case dragged on with the woman hiding behind her husband's diplomatic role until finally she pleaded guilty and was given an eight month suspended sentence for manslaughter. she has not returned to the UK.

Thanks for that.

She muat have been really shaken up after such an experience,

like so often, a day that starts like any day and suddenly..........

boom!

 

[Whyayeman]

Thanks for that.

She muat have been really shaken up after such an experience,

like so often, a day that starts like any day and suddenly..........

boom!

Not as shaken up as Harry Dunn, the boy she killed. Then she ran off and refused to acknowledge her crime while the Dunn family grieved.

She has, in effect, got off. She refused to return to England to face trial - and Harry's family.

 

[BNR32FAN]

We have members on here who have various views on whether or not we should have the death penalty.

I will summarize this video
The person in the video murdered an elderly victim, this was unprovoked and completely random
For that crime the judge figured that 8 years would be a sufficient punishment

What do you think of that? Would you feel uncomfortable about a society letting known murderers walk free eventually?

We need to also think here for a moment that since this attack was unprovoked and random, it could have been anybody. And the victim that died was somebody's grandparent.

So I ask all that answers this question to put yourself in the shoes of the grieving family.

People are complex and unpredictable creatures. Sometimes they change for the better, sometimes for the worst. I think if someone killed my grandmother, parents, wife, or kids I would be devastated. I’d absolutely hate them, but at some point I would have to forgive them IF they showed remorse and regret. If they didn’t show any remorse or regret then they don’t deserve to be forgiven.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I have to say that I cannot support the death penalty. A major emerging problem, I believe, is that there is a mindset that does not even support necessary incarceration. There seem to be appropriate psychological, not physical, punishments that could be applied to necessarily punish, & hopefully redeem, murderers.

I disagree, repeat offenders and those who mock morality and have absolutely no remorse should be put to death. A guy that goes out and murders someone then gets put in prison only to get out and do it again and still has no remorse has no place in society. It’s no different than releasing a wild lion into a rural subdivision and hoping for the best. It’s the governing authority’s responsibility to prevent these kinds of people from hurting others.

 

[jayem]

I have mixed feeling about capital punishment:

1) Some crimes are so abhorrent, cruel, vicious, and hateful that nothing but execution would seem to be warranted. I'm thinking of the Nazi war criminals,, or anyone convicted of genocide, or deliberate mass murder. Would anything other than death be appropriate justice for the perpetrators of such atrocities?

2) OTOH, some punishments might be worse than death. Like lifetime confinement in the Colorado ADX "Supermax" prison. The forever home of such luminaries as drug kingpin "El Chapo" Guzman, Olympic bomber Eric Rudolph, Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsnarnaev, and the Unibomber Ted Kaczinsky., Who died this June. There are various levels of security. But imagine spending the rest of your life in a 7 X 12 foot concrete room. With one thick glass window at ceiling level. Meals are eaten alone in your cell. Your only visitors can be legal counsel and clergy, and must be scheduled in advance. It's essentially lifetime solitary confinement for the worst of the worse.

 

[MehGuy]

I lean more to rehabilitation, although I understand that some people should ever be free again for the sake of the public's safety. The idea of punishment seems crude... and I think humanity needs to get past that. Prison should be much more humane. More like the prison system we see in Norway. As someone who leans more into the idea of nature than nurture... it does give me sympathy to some criminals. Some people have the genetic deck stacked against them. Even nurture... I wonder how many of us would be if we had to walk in their shoes?

Punishments always seemed too arbitrary to me anyways. I think it's better to just view criminals as sick people in need of care.

Hopefully future generations see this as an ugly blight of humanity... like how we view how slavery was accepted in the past.

 

[Whyayeman]

I have to say that I cannot support the death penalty. A major emerging problem, I believe, is that there is a mindset that does not even support necessary incarceration. There seem to be appropriate psychological, not physical, punishments that could be applied to necessarily punish, & hopefully redeem, murderers.

I think prison is over-used as a punishment. Most men in prison in the UK are there for minor offences. Many of them could be more appropriately sentenced to community orders served while living at home.

However, I don't know of anybody pressing for such sentences for murder. For that and other serious offences incarceration is necessary and desirable for the safety of the public.

 

[Robban]

We have members on here who have various views on whether or not we should have the death penalty.

I will summarize this video
The person in the video murdered an elderly victim, this was unprovoked and completely random
For that crime the judge figured that 8 years would be a sufficient punishment

What do you think of that? Would you feel uncomfortable about a society letting known murderers walk free eventually?

We need to also think here for a moment that since this attack was unprovoked and random, it could have been anybody. And the victim that died was somebody's grandparent.

So I ask all that answers this question to put yourself in the shoes of the grieving family.

A two minute video, is that justice?

No mention of witnesses either..