Quote:
|
Originally Posted by "The_Rorschach
Regardless of standard definitions, it is a societal abheration to commit a crime against one's fellow man. We come from the same culture were citizens lobby to enforce equality and protect an abstract right over something as trivial as personal property. Why then is it we show sudden temerity in limiting the active influence of those whom have shown themselves incapable of respecting the basic right to personal security which even Hobbes admitted was inherent to civilized life?
Degrees of murder, to protect innocent men from suffering unduly for a crime they did not intentionally commit. . .That is the spirit behind those rulings, but you seem to have forgotten that in favour of the law's letter. This man is guilty of his current accusations, additionally, he is a convicted criminal for past transgressions whom the system failed to rehabilitize. He is now a liability to the basic rights of everyone around him, and as such, must be removed from society for the good of all. He assaulted his own wife. Think on that for a moment. The one person who was closest to his heart, the single soul whom shared his most intimiate confidences, and he abused her in the most base and foul manner. Then, in addition, he assaulted the very person to intercede on her behalf. He has shown what he is capable of, and if the system is just, he will recieve what is his due.
I only wish he could hang.
|
You can be guilty of something and still not deserve life in prison. A person who consistently jaywalks after numerous tickets...does that person deserve to be removed from society? Someone who steals food b/c he can't afford it, and does it again each time he is released from prison b/c he can't get on his feet...does he deserve life after a certain amount of time.
And don't forget a "crime" is defined in society by a politicians view of what society wants, not necessarily "natural law". Homosexuality was a crime up until about 3 wks. ago...do those men deserve life for committing homosexual acts against the "law"?
I also brought out degrees of murder as an example of measuring intent. There are other degrees as well such as petty theft v. grand theft, the difference being price. Grand theft v. joyriding. Felony-murder v. 2nd degree murder (of which felony-murder can carry a death sentence for someone the accused didn't 'intend' to kill while 2nd degree is 15-20)? It's never simply "did he do it"? So if the man's insane is there less time...of course, b/c of diminished culpability, so we find him to have committed crimes less intentionally...he still committed it and is guilty of it.
Threaded Mode
