[Maciej]

And all over an X-box and some clothes?

[johnq]

Here we go, breathless media frenzy over violence & video games. And banning or requiring licenses for bats. (Just predicting). They love to upspin individual instances into pandemic societal crises.

But god forbid we say killing and stealing is bad, that borders on religion!



Stupid crime, they'll find out what it's like to be a victim soon, in jail.

[FFL]

hmm, what was it I once heard said about the Sunshine State?
"all the nuts roll downhill, straight to Florida"

[Mass Appeal]

They were just really looking forward to the upcoming release of Doom 3.
Seriously though, don't mess with a man's gaming console.

Hey FFL, in other parts of the nation kids get jacked for their sneakers down here we pull stunts for chrome GBA's with the sapphire version of Pokemon. They just representin' the true players down here in the dirty dirty. Big ups to my man Master Chief and the whole Walt Disney Massif.

[Moogs]

Originally Posted by johnq Here we go, breathless media frenzy over violence & video games. And banning or requiring licenses for bats. (Just predicting). They love to upspin individual instances into pandemic societal crises.

I think you're totally missing the point John. The point isn't that they're trying to say video game violence sparked this crime. But that someone could be so ignorant and cold-blooded as to kill an entire family over a $150 game console (wether they stole it or not).

They beat people to death for stealing something that wasn't even worth $200. That's the point. Not sure how you could possibly miss that....

[Kickaha]

But somehow the death penalty is bad.

[Maciej]

They beat them to death with bats... an entire family. Somehow death penalty just doesn't quite say it. In my opinion.

[Mass Appeal]

Originally Posted by Sh0eWax They beat them to death with bats... an entire family. Somehow death penalty just doesn't quite say it. In my opinion.

There has been a lot of debate over the death penalty and the use of the electric chair here.You should check out Errol Morris' doc. Mr. Death. The electric chair is a brutal piece of machinery and I believe the death caused by it is on par with the beating of another human being. It took us three tries to fry one guy. Can you imagine how horrible that must have been? In fact I would choose to be beaten to death then let the jokers who run our peanal system strap me in the toaster. One good wack to the head and your pretty much out of it where as with the chair you have searing pain throughout your entire body, you shit and piss yourself, then your head catches on fire and after all that it may take a couple of more tries to finnish you off.

It's not just the crimminals here who've cranked it up a knotch. Lately the cops in Orange County have been using that little electric chair known as the taser. They've already killed four people with it this year, most were intoxicated and resisted arrest so the cops shocked them untill they died. It wasn't untill local television stations and civic groups put pressure on them that they changed their procedures with dealing with suspected crack addicts. Thier original response was extremely callous. As long as you don't smoke crack you don't have to worry but if you do and you resist arrest it's not our fault when we kill you.

[billybobsky]

No, you see, societies vengence isn't played out well if you kill the a-holes. The need to suffer in a unique and apropos means. Lets have them fight to the death mortal combat style...

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Mass Appeal There has been a lot of debate over the death penalty and the use of the electric chair here.You should check out Errol Morris' doc. Mr. Death. The electric chair is a brutal piece of machinery and I believe the death caused by it is on par with the beating of another human being. It took us three tries to fry one guy. Can you imagine how horrible that must have been? In fact I would choose to be beaten to death then let the jokers who run our peanal system strap me in the toaster. One good wack to the head and your pretty much out of it where as with the chair you have searing pain throughout your entire body, you shit and piss yourself, then your head catches on fire and after all that it may take a couple of more tries to finnish you off.

And yet, for some animals masquerading as human beings, I can't bring myself to care that they suffer in their final moments. Seems fitting.

Then the human side of me takes over and says that a simple 9mm to the back of the head is quick, cheap, and painless, and ultimately a much better way to deal with them. Less drama, less pathos, but it gets the job done.

[Mass Appeal]

Originally Posted by billybobsky No, you see, societies vengence isn't played out well if you kill the a-holes. The need to suffer in a unique and apropos means. Lets have them fight to the death mortal combat style...

I know, have them play a death match in Golden Eye. One shot one kill one life. The first three to bite it get fed to wild dogs. While the "winner" gets to live out the rest of his days as the guy in the Mickey Mouse costume at Disney World. He'd have to spend his whole life hamming it up for the kids stuck in that suit.

[Mass Appeal]

Originally Posted by Kickaha And yet, for some animals masquerading as human beings, I can't bring myself to care that they suffer in their final moments. Seems fitting. Then the human side of me takes over and says that a simple 9mm to the back of the head is quick, cheap, and painless, and ultimately a much better way to deal with them. Less drama, less pathos, but it gets the job done.

Unfortunately some of those "animals" we've killed turned out later to be innocent. Oops. A bullet to the head would be much cheaper, It costs a lot to fry someone. As mentioned in the Errol Morris film the urine from the inmates puddles on the ground near the corrections officers witnessing the execution causing possible injury to them if it takes more then one jolt or if they go for a double header. Very messy.

[Maciej]

I wasn't aware that any states still used the Electric Chair, I thought they had all transitioned to lethal injection. I think the time to reevaluate the corrections system is coming, because eventually it is going to become very burdensome to house all of our inmates. The death penalty does not help this very much either, because only a small fraction of cons. are executed, and housing for them on death row can be very expensive as well.

[johnq]

Originally Posted by Moogs I think you're totally missing the point John. The point isn't that they're trying to say video game violence sparked this crime. But that someone could be so ignorant and cold-blooded as to kill an entire family over a $150 game console (wether they stole it or not). They beat people to death for stealing something that wasn't even worth $200. That's the point. Not sure how you could possibly miss that....

Not sure how you missed I was speaking in the hypothetical, and not about anything anyone already said. I was pre-lamenting the inevitable.

But, in my opinion, the word XBOX alone is sexy enough for the Joseph Liebermans* of the world to clamor to somehow make this into a "videogames are an addiction, see how people will kill over them?" überexample.

I give it a week. Once I get quotes that support this eyerolling dread of mine, I'll post them.

Maybe the hypothetical isn't your thing, if not ignore me. No need to correct me.

But I know quite well that this crime is a tragedy, over something completely stupid, no need to act like I don't know that. The death penalty is perfectly suited for this case (assuming they are found to be actually guilty <-- said out of appreciation for our ideal legal system, not for any other reason)

The idea that these f'kers could get life and actually have XBOXes in their cells is repugnant, more so than having them executed, to me anyway.

--
* Note: This is not a code word for "Jews" or "Democrats". It refers to all those that try to outlaw violent and/or pornographic content, even when such things are clearly marketed to adults. Rather than blame parents or stores or specific adults that provide this stuff to kids, they blame the industry and try to shut it all down "for the sake of the children" etc. etc.

Breathless banning frenzies ensue. Prohibition never works. Personal responsibility and good parenting does. But you can't legislate those.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Mass Appeal Unfortunately some of those "animals" we've killed turned out later to be innocent. Oops.

Yup. Just like many people we've jailed have later turned out to be innocent. It's a problem with the system, not the punishment. You can no more give someone back 20 years of their life, than you can bring them back from the dead. The entire anti-death-penalty argument that we might kill an innocent person is a red herring IMNSHO. Don't fight the punishment, fight the crappy system... then the punishment will be meted out when appropriate, and in that case I have zero problem with it. It's too bad we don't have penal colonies anymore, but in the absence of such, eliminate them outright.

[Luca]

Originally Posted by johnq But, in my opinion, the word XBOX alone is sexy enough for the John Ashcrofts* of the world to clamor to somehow make this into a "videogames are an addiction, see how people will kill over them?" überexample.

Fixed.

By the way, I am strongly against the death penalty just because I think that in an advanced nation we shouldn't have state-sponsored killings, but even if we stay with it (which seems likely, there are only a handful of states that don't have the death penalty), I agree that we have to fix the system. John Edwards and many others supports the death penalty only if there is DNA evidence directly linking the suspect to the crime. And the use of DNA evidence is being encouraged all over, despite it being expensive. IMHO, it's impossible for incontrovertible evidence to be "too expensive."

[Mass Appeal]

Originally Posted by Kickaha Yup. Just like many people we've jailed have later turned out to be innocent. It's a problem with the system, not the punishment. You can no more give someone back 20 years of their life, than you can bring them back from the dead. The entire anti-death-penalty argument that we might kill an innocent person is a red herring IMNSHO. Don't fight the punishment, fight the crappy system... then the punishment will be meted out when appropriate, and in that case I have zero problem with it. It's too bad we don't have penal colonies anymore, but in the absence of such, eliminate them outright.

Except that when we find out someone has been jailed wrongly we can release them. When we execute someone that is later found innocent we can do nothing. I for one do not want an innocent man's blood on my hands. As long as humans run the justice system, and it remains heavily politicized, it will never be free of mistakes.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Mass Appeal Except that when we find out someone has been jailed wrongly we can release them.

Can you give them back their years? Can you give them back their relationships? Their self-dignity? Can you erase the years of abuse at the hands of other inmates? Can you make them *just like they were*?

No. You cannot.

You can NEVER undo a punishment that involves jail time, any more than you can one that involves death.

Fix the system. This continual focus on one particular punishment is just a distraction from the real problem.

For those particular cases where there is no question of guilt (which are few), and where there is no realistic chance of rehabilitation (which I firmly believe in, and our current jail system lacks), then there is no good reason why the rest of society should support their life. They have shown themselves to be incapable of not being a danger to others, and have volunteered for removal from society. To do so at the expense of other pressing needs of those who *do* wish to be contributing members (such as education), to support their lives is, in my opinion, unconscionable. There are others who need. Don't waste societal resources on those that have proven themselves to be incapable of being part of that society.

As I said, it is unfortunate that we no longer have penal colonies we can send such cases to. They should be removed from society, and asking society to support them instead of contributing members is insane.

[Mass Appeal]

You can't replace the years and relationships lost but at least they would have the chance to make knew ones and through counseling they would be able to heal the emotional scaring. I would suggest everyone go see the play Exonerated. It's about several individuals who were on death row but later released. All thier stories are horrible and point out how screwed up our system is. Most of those people I'm sure contemplated suicide at one point or the other but all have begun to go about life as before their incarceration. If asked would they rather have been executed or been given the chance to rejoin society I'm sure they would choose the later.

How is the discussion of the rightness or wrongness of the death penalty distracting from the greater picture of system reform.

If someone attacked my family or friends and lethal force was required to prevent harm to them I would most certainly do whatever was neccesary. However, after the situation was resolved and the criminal was safetly behind bars I hope I would still not carry a blood thirst for that person's life. Society needs to take the moral high ground in these situations and not stoop to the level of the killers we condem.

[johnq]

Not fixed. If you must take the burden off of a Democrat at least say

But, in my opinion, the word XBOX alone is sexy enough for the John Ashcrofts/Joseph Liebermans of the world to clamor to somehow make this into a "videogames are an addiction, see how people will kill over them?" überexample

...because it is quite a non-partisan issue. I only say Lieberman specifically because he has fought for banning specific types of games/content. I don't recall Ashcroft getting into that but I don't doubt it either.

Don't see "Dem bashing" where there is none.

Can I not be critical of a Democrat? Must I only limit myself to Republican punching bags? I am a Democrat (although as reluctantly as possible) and I think Lieberman sucks. Those are not mutually exclusive.

Anyway I'm sure I'm off topic now, sorry.

Leaving for 2 weeks. Rejoice.

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by johnq Can I not be critical of a Democrat?

Why not? I am, every chance I get.

[Mass Appeal]

From what I've seen and read in the local media there is not a whiff of placing blame on the violent content of video games. Most of the coverage has been focused on the sheer senselessness of the crime, and various sheriff officers calling for the death penalty. I think the only thought related to video games that people will take away is the dollar amount that those items represent. $250 of supposedly stolen merchindise does not equal the lives of six people and a dog.

Lieberman isn't a Democrat his a fascist. We can thank him and Tipper for the little parental advisary stickers.( In chiding grandmotherly tone) We must protect the little ones musn't we.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Mass Appeal You can't replace the years and relationships lost but at least they would have the chance to make knew ones and through counseling they would be able to heal the emotional scaring. I would suggest everyone go see the play Exonerated. It's about several individuals who were on death row but later released. All thier stories are horrible and point out how screwed up our system is. Most of those people I'm sure contemplated suicide at one point or the other but all have begun to go about life as before their incarceration. If asked would they rather have been executed or been given the chance to rejoin society I'm sure they would choose the later.

Death... or being let free... yeah, gee, that's a tough one, isn't it?? :P

How is the discussion of the rightness or wrongness of the death penalty distracting from the greater picture of system reform.

Because the anti-death penalty groups concentrate on the *PENALTY ONLY*. They never seem to discuss how the same exact system that seems to be incapable of handing out death penalties is also handing out *other* punishments just as poorly. The most commonly used argument I've seen is that well, the system isn't perfect, so execution is bad. Um, no. That means that the system is imperfect, and needs to be fixed so that *any* punishment handed out is to the proper person. It's mixing two separate issues, and the net result is that a perfectly acceptable punishment is denied to society, while the *REAL* problem, that of a system that convicts wrongfully, is allowed to exist, because as soon as that penalty is eliminated, the groups in question quiet down... and nothing of any *substance* is ever fixed. It's the usual knee-jerk response of putting band-aids over symptoms, and avoiding the seriously difficult core issues at hand that cause the symptoms in the first place because gee golly, that's *hard*. And wowzers, if the *symptom* is buried, then everyone can pat each other on the back and say "Aren't we great people??" Sad.

If someone attacked my family or friends and lethal force was required to prevent harm to them I would most certainly do whatever was neccesary. However, after the situation was resolved and the criminal was safetly behind bars I hope I would still not carry a blood thirst for that person's life. Society needs to take the moral high ground in these situations and not stoop to the level of the killers we condem.

It's not blood thirst. It's simple economics and resource allocation. There are individuals who have, through their own voluntary actions, proven themselves unfit to interact with society without providing a danger to others. Why should society take money and resources away, from say, educating a child, or feeding a family, to keep that animal alive? They can't be let into general society, and using societal resources to keep them alive just cheats everyone. Just get rid of them, and use the money for something that is productive, instead of just a waste. It's just that simple.

[johnq]

Well, I'm waiting for the editorials to roll out, not so much the current factual news pieces. The fact that "XBOX" is being used rather than "property" or "video game" is the first step in demonizing by brand name.

Manhunt was already pulled in some places when shoddy journalism/panicky speculation asserted that a murderer owned it and was the inspiration for the killing. But then it was found that only the victim owned it, it had nothing to do with the murder.

It's not only games, but baseball bats. I bet any amount of money we'll see bans on selling bats to minors soon. (Not to be confused with the existing movements to ban aluminum bats due to higher injury rates).

We have a panic frenzy mindset in this country. If a guy went on a eye gouging spree with a pen, you can bet they'd be banned (or someone would try). We aren't content to find the reasons for rage or mental illness or apathy or loneliness or depression - the actual causes for violence. Just pump them full of drugs and hide all the sharp/deadly objects.

This is a really weird case. I can see Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, a Matrix meets homoerotic Romeo and Juliet tragi-thrillkill. 2 killers is fairly common. (Henry and Otis). But I don't see getting 4 guys to do this. I can't see how one out of the 3 couldn't say "F'ck this, I'm not going to jail over your frigging XBOX". They should have robbed a bank at least. Dumbass gangsta wannabes.

All crime is stupid but this is the dumbest ever.

[eventhorizon]

Originally Posted by Kickaha But somehow the death penalty is bad.

"to kill a man in a paroxysm of passion is understandable, but to have him killed by someone else after calm and serious meditation and on the pretext of duty honourably discharged is incomprehensible"
-The Marquis deSade


I find it disgusting that "because it's cheaper to kill them" is even considered being used as an argument for the death penalty. It's cheaper to do a lot of things that aren't necessarily good or right or just. The economics of the situation shouldn't be brought up in a discussion of ethics.

[Barto]

It's wrong for one man to kill another, so wrong the killer should be killed. Because killing is wrong.

Barto

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by eventhorizon "to kill a man in a paroxysm of passion is understandable, but to have him killed by someone else after calm and serious meditation and on the pretext of duty honourably discharged is incomprehensible" -The Marquis deSade I find it disgusting that "because it's cheaper to kill them" is even considered being used as an argument for the death penalty. It's cheaper to do a lot of things that aren't necessarily good or right or just. The economics of the situation shouldn't be brought up in a discussion of ethics.

The greater good of society as an ethical question *is* precisely the point of incarceration in the first place. In situations where permanent removal from society is the *only* adequate solution, then the relative cost to society, as a matter of basic resources, is the prime consideration. And the basic resources of our modern society is measured in dollars.

So yes, the relative economics of the situation is highly relevant.

Would you rather I term it in measures of meals to needy families? How about hours available for teaching children? What terminology would you prefer to use, when discussing wasting resources to keep certain individuals permanently out of society, due to their own heinous actions?

[eventhorizon]

I fundamentally disagree with your approach to this topic. There's no common ground for us to argue.

[Luca]

Originally Posted by johnq I only say Lieberman specifically because he has fought for banning specific types of games/content. I don't recall Ashcroft getting into that but I don't doubt it either. Don't see "Dem bashing" where there is none. Can I not be critical of a Democrat? Must I only limit myself to Republican punching bags? I am a Democrat (although as reluctantly as possible) and I think Lieberman sucks. Those are not mutually exclusive. Anyway I'm sure I'm off topic now, sorry. Leaving for 2 weeks. Rejoice.

Don't see Republican bashing where there is none either. I simply changed it to Ashcroft because as I recall, Ashcroft is one of the most paranoid fundamentalist right-wingers I have heard of. You know, afraid of dancing and nudity and so forth. So yes, it really should be Ashcrofts/Liebermans, because people who want to ban video games, movies, etc are all kind of in the same boat as far as I can tell.

So yeah, you can be critical of a democrat. I was adding balance by pointing out that Ashcroft is at least as bad as Lieberman.

[FFL]

The 6-foot-5 Victorino has spent eight of the past 11 years in prison and was arrested for a probation violation eight days before the killings.

Seems that society has already spent quite a bit of time and money trying to rehabilitate Mr. Victorino.