It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

BTK Killer - Bleeding Hearts Explain To Me Why He Should Not Be Dead

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 09:33 AM
link   
.
If one of his victims was someone i cared about I would personally want him chained up as i carved him slowly up myself. Dripping salt and mild acids for maximum pain and longest lingering death.

Perhaps something could be learned by studying him.
As an insight as to whether he was a unique product of his genetics or circumstances and what were the factors that make a person do these things. But unless there was a rash of people like him appearing in the population at large i would first consult with and do the will of the victims families.

I care about the 100,000 dead Americans and Iraqis in Iraq,
and nothing beyond intellectual curiosity about this guy.
.




posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 11:00 AM
link   


If one of his victims was someone i cared about I would personally want him chained up as i carved him slowly up myself. Dripping salt and mild acids for maximum pain and longest lingering death.


Well, that's a little stronger than I was saying, however I don't disagree in this instance. It is warranted here. I read this morning that he will be in his cell for 23 hours a day, in other words he will be protected, costing us even more tax dollars..........





I care about the 100,000 dead Americans and Iraqis in Iraq,
and nothing beyond intellectual curiosity about this guy.
.


Well said. But I still say just off this guy and get it over with.



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 11:04 AM
link   


If one of his victims was someone i cared about I would personally want him chained up as i carved him slowly up myself. Dripping salt and mild acids for maximum pain and longest lingering death.


If we're calling him sick and twisted for torturing his victims, it's a double standard to advocate torturing him, surely?

Wouldn't that put us at his level?

Aren't we meant to know better, to lead by example of what decent human beings don't do to one another?



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
If we're calling him sick and twisted for torturing his victims, it's a double standard to advocate torturing him, surely?

Wouldn't that put us at his level?


No, it certainly would not. He tortured INNOCENT people. Children. He is NOT an innocent person, he's not even a person. The reason the death penalty is not a "deterrent", is because it takes many years to carry out, and when it is actually carried out, it is done far too humanely, so one may allow their sick urges to have more influence on their behavior knowing a death sentence is dependent on alot of factors and it's in no way a guarantee for them. In cases like this and ONLY in cases like this, where a person is guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt of stalking and intentionally killing innocent people, especially children, the death sentence should be carried out immediately and it should be EXTREMELY gruesome and slow and filmed and available for any who wish to see what awaits them if they act on their sick impulses.



Aren't we meant to know better, to lead by example of what decent human beings don't do to one another?


Yes, what you state is true, however as you imply, we must lead by example of what decent human beings don't do to one another. This thing is neither decent, nor a human being, and we must also lead by example of what decent human beings do to sick, selfish demons on earth who may decide to intentionally stalk and kill one of us or our precious children.

If you are personally opposed to this and bound by your religion not to kill under any circumstances, that's fine, don't apply for an executioner job and you should be fine in whatever afterlife you believe in. You don't have to kill him, allow somebody who does not feel it wrong to slowly gut this monster like a fish and smear his own entrails in his face, to take care of the killing. There is no shortage of us who are more than willing to do so.



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Unfortunately, laws and leading by example only work for honest, sane people. The rest need to simply be dealt with. I suspect that the humanitarian side of punishment is going to be, eventually, going by the waysidek, and we will be back to "PUNISHMENT".

Things just have a way of cycling like that.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 02:20 AM
link   
Chester Molesters of his kind don't usually find a duration of life too long in prison. Remember Dahmer?



posted on Aug, 25 2005 @ 11:54 AM
link   
simply because the death penalty doesn't work as a deterant.

America is the only civilised western country to still put people to death. How many people are executed then found out later to be innocent?

The death penalty doesn't do anything to prevent the crimes taking place in the first place and for people such as this BTK guy he knew he would be given the detah penalty if casught and it had no effect on preventing him for commiting his terrrible crimes.

The US murder rates dont support the theory that it is a deterant

In addition I believe that nobody has the right to take another persons life. Being imprisoned for the rest of his life, facing daily threats of violence and actual acts of violence from the other inmates is a far greater punishment



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 01:13 PM
link   


simply because the death penalty doesn't work as a deterant.


I completely agree with you on that. And it is only in the US that I believe this holds true. IT is because of the fact we use humane ways to kill people instead of stoning or beheading.




America is the only civilised western country to still put people to death. How many people are executed then found out later to be innocent?


China and Japan? I consider them Western Civilized. They have Lethal Injected and shot people for Death sentences in recent years. A lot of countries have turned away from it. There are still a few users out there.




Being imprisoned for the rest of his life, facing daily threats of violence and actual acts of violence from the other inmates is a far greater punishment


Right now I would say yes this is true. A serial killer or cold blooded killer has no concept of their life or anyone elses. They could probably care less if they died. It would probably be more of a punishment to put someone like that in a Prison with the General population and let them live the rest of their life in fear of being raped to death by some 6'7 300lb guy named princess. The prisons should hire out some huge gay guys and let them roam prisons freely to seek out the killers, child molesters, and rapist. Now that is a punishment and Deterant.

I agree with the death penalty only because I know I would not stop until the person were dead if they killed or harmed anyone of my family members or friends. Also, I do not want my taxes going to rehabiltate some guy who is a cold blooded killer and that has no second chance at life. God has a serious talking to do with him and we shall arrange that meeting.

We need to do things like they do in Iran, Singapore and Afghanistan. Brutal death penalties. Being killed by people throwing stones at you is one hell of a deterant.



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 01:56 PM
link   

If you are personally opposed to this and bound by your religion not to kill under any circumstances, that's fine, don't apply for an executioner job and you should be fine in whatever afterlife you believe in. You don't have to kill him, allow somebody who does not feel it wrong to slowly gut this monster like a fish and smear his own entrails in his face, to take care of the killing.


And if we reversed this...

If YOU are personally opposed to not advocating other alternatives, then that's fine - don't apply for a job with AI, and you should feel fine...you don't have to watch him in his cell, allow someone else who feels it's ok to give a LWOP sentence do so instead.


You know?

If you're adamant about solving this issue - why don't we start by actually trying to prevent it from happening in the first place?



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
And if we reversed this...

If YOU are personally opposed to not advocating other alternatives, then that's fine - don't apply for a job with AI, and you should feel fine...you don't have to watch him in his cell, allow someone else who feels it's ok to give a LWOP sentence do so instead.


You know?


I wouldn't feel fine, and I don't feel fine knowing somebody ADMITTED to doing things so horrible to children and innocent people, is going to be fed and housed for the rest of his life at our expense, when there are countless individuals living on the streets, and eating out of trash cans, some with no famly and varied mental or physical problems that make them unable to work, who do not have that luxury. My only source of comfort comes from knowing he will most likely die the painful death he has coming to him, just like Dahmer.



If you're adamant about solving this issue - why don't we start by actually trying to prevent it from happening in the first place?


You must not have read my post, I firmly believe that an immediately carried out, gruesome and extremely painful death would prevent this kind of thing from happening, once again, only in cases like this, Jessica Lunsford, etc., where there is no doubt whatsoever who is guilty. As it stands, one can count on a lengthy appeals process if sentenced to death, and 20 years after the sentencing, IF it's actually carried out, a quick and humane death. So they take there chances. I think a vast majority of these crimes would be deterred if the monsters contemplating them factored in immediately carried out, lengthy, and torturous death.

I highly doubt though that anything I can say will change your mind, your beliefs are probably as strong as mine. Personally, I can't even begin to phathom having the slightest bit of pity or concern for this man's life, and if it had been your child (god forbid), I doubt you would feel the way you do. You may say you would, but as a father, I know you wouldn't. Your concern should be with the victims and their families, not with the monster. Your empathy, in my opinion, is misplaced.



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
I wouldn't feel fine, and I don't feel fine knowing somebody ADMITTED to doing things so horrible to children and innocent people..... My only source of comfort comes from knowing he will most likely die the painful death he has coming to him, just like Dahmer.


It's more expensive to execute a prisoner.

I'm actually not ok with the concept of wishing or hoping a heinous death on anyone. That doesn't mean I sympathise with or support this man, by any means...but rather, I don't support the notion of "and eye for an eye", so to speak, which includes torture and/or the death penalty.



You must not have read my post, I firmly believe that an immediately carried out, gruesome and extremely painful death would prevent this kind of thing from happening, once again, only in cases like this, Jessica Lunsford, etc., where there is no doubt whatsoever who is guilty


But the death penalty is not an effective deterrent...whilst it does ensure the convicted guy won't do it again, it won't prevent the next one from committing the same crimes particularly when we're talking about child sex offenders. So, if the goal is preventing the already convicted guy from doing it again, LWOP accomplishes that.



. As it stands, one can count on a lengthy appeals process if sentenced to death, and 20 years after the sentencing, IF it's actually carried out, a quick and humane death. So they take there chances. I think a vast majority of these crimes would be deterred if the monsters contemplating them factored in immediately carried out, lengthy, and torturous death.


I'd be more inclined to agree if we weren't talking about serial child killers. These people are driven by a compulsion, and one which is virtually impossible to overcome. The threat of death would, in all likelihood, simply make them more determined not to get caught. It wouldn't deter them.



Personally, I can't even begin to phathom having the slightest bit of pity or concern for this man's life, and if it had been your child (god forbid), I doubt you would feel the way you do. You may say you would, but as a father, I know you wouldn't. Your concern should be with the victims and their families, not with the monster. Your empathy, in my opinion, is misplaced.


Please look here .

With all due respect, you simply don't know my response. Please don't make such assumptions. For one thing, my stance on the death penalty is in no way lessening the compassion I feel for the victim and his/her family. If this sounds defensive, then I truly do apologise in advance, but again - you simply cannot know my history, my reactions or my motives unless I've chosen to share 'em with you. You know?


Also, understand that I am not singling out this man for pity, or compassion. Rather, it's the death penalty itself I'm protesting.

I'm sure we're not going to agree on this, and that's fine. But again, I respectfully ask that you don't make the assumption that me or my family haven't suffered something equally tragic.



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
It's more expensive to execute a prisoner.


Not if it's carried out immediately. I too am against the death penalty, as it currently stands. I think it should be carried out swiftly, and only in cases where guilt is absolute. In cases where there's the slightest doubt, than life in prison is fine with me.



I'm actually not ok with the concept of wishing or hoping a heinous death on anyone. That doesn't mean I sympathise with or support this man, by any means...but rather, I don't support the notion of "and eye for an eye", so to speak, which includes torture and/or the death penalty.


That's fine. You're entitled to your beliefs. I am ok with inflicting a heinous death on a creature that tortures and kills an innocent child.



But the death penalty is not an effective deterrent...whilst it does ensure the convicted guy won't do it again, it won't prevent the next one from committing the same crimes particularly when we're talking about child sex offenders. So, if the goal is preventing the already convicted guy from doing it again, LWOP accomplishes that.


Again, you've sailed right past what I stated, almost as if you didn't even read it. I agree the death penalty, as it stands isn't working. It needs to be more harsh and carried out quickly to deter, IMO. How would LWOP deter? It hasn't thus far anymore than the death penalty has. You're being highly selective in what punishments you are saying don't work. It is well understood by anybody, especially in states that don't have the death penalty, that if you intentionally murder an innocent person, you will most likely spend life behind bars, unless you're OJ.



I'd be more inclined to agree if we weren't talking about serial child killers. These people are driven by a compulsion, and one which is virtually impossible to overcome. The threat of death would, in all likelihood, simply make them more determined not to get caught. It wouldn't deter them.


Sex of any kind can be a compulsion, as with gambling, drinking, smoking, etc. We're compelled to do what we enjoy. If I knew that having sex with my girlfriend would result in me being beheaded with a rusty knife, I would use my hand and call it a night. Compulsion can be overcome if the consequences are severe enough, maybe not in every case, but it would make a BIG difference.




Please look here .


I'm at work and that link won't pull up, it says it's innappropriate. So I'll assume you're showing me that a family member of yours has been victimized in some way or another, if so, I'm sorry to hear that.



With all due respect, you simply don't know my response. Please don't make such assumptions. For one thing, my stance on the death penalty is in no way lessening the compassion I feel for the victim and his/her family. If this sounds defensive, then I truly do apologise in advance, but again - you simply cannot know my history, my reactions or my motives unless I've chosen to share 'em with you. You know?


Also, understand that I am not singling out this man for pity, or compassion. Rather, it's the death penalty itself I'm protesting.

I'm sure we're not going to agree on this, and that's fine. But again, I respectfully ask that you don't make the assumption that me or my family haven't suffered something equally tragic.


If your response is still the same if your child were to be harmed, or somebody in your family victimized, then we are so much different from each other it's pointless to debate. At least we both can agree it's wrong to kill innocent people, after that...........

Hate is an important emotion, it balances love. In order to be balanced emotionally, I believe one must know when to hate. If we were to love everybody, even those who murder our children, than what value does that put on love?



[edit on 26-8-2005 by 27jd]



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 07:20 PM
link   
Hmmm...there's nothing particularly bad on the link...I'll try and find a more user-friendly one though


I absolutely see your point of view. We just disagree on a few basic premises, you know?

As far as hatred goes...generally, the only time it's even remotely helpful is when that hatred can lead to something positive arising from the tragedy; when it's not productive it can simply add to the unhappiness and the loss, as it keeps the cycle of discontentment running endlessly. In addition though, we can still feel anger and loss even if we're not feeling hatred.

I suppose I see different types of love. I love my parents in a much different way than I love a partner. It's possible (to me at least) to love, and love strongly, whilst believing that hatred is perhaps the most destructive of emotions.

Not to mention..hatred often makes it impossible for the families to arrive at any sort of closure.

But, as we've both discovered, we're not going to agree on this one. I've really appreciated this back and forth though



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 07:34 PM
link   
It's probably not the link, the filters at my work are so dumb, there are alot of sites that have no questionable material that I can't access, and some that have totally questionable material that I can. Oh well. I'll just look when I go home, which is soon.

But I think this topic will be argued for centuries to come. I guess it's just a matter of one's personality, and the things that have happened during there lives that formed their beliefs. It's impossible to make everybody see things our way, but again, at least we can agree it's wrong to hurt innocent people. That's the most important thing. But I'm outta here now, type to ya later.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join