Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Situations aren't always so cut-and-dried, though. Witnesses say, that there were multiple shooters in the room when R. Kennedy was shot. Which shooter's was the bullet the killed the candidate? Why weren't those other people arrested, investigated, and put on trial?
If I remember correctly they had to break his hand to get the gun. I would like to know who those "witnesses" were and where they have been for fifty years. All credible evidence points to Sirhan being the slayer. At some point facts need to be considered as established.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth
But aside from that, and given that SS hasn't expressed remorse, maybe the entire issue isn't about "believing in ourselves" (which concept I still don't understand in this context), but rather about society evolving since the 1800's, when McKinley was President. More people are questioning whether putting people to death is a good idea. If you go back far enough in history, people used to be stoned to death for perceived crimes and behavior outside the narrowly-accepted norms of their time. If we've stopped stoning people, does that mean we con't "believe in ourselfes"? Or does it mean that human society has been gradually developing more humanitarian values?
Putting McKinley's or RFK's killer to death is hardly stoning someone to death for "perceived" crimes. At some point the societal judgment on what is a crime must be established. Never has killing a President or presidential candidate been acceptable practice. It is only because we have allowed the justice system to become dysfunctional that this is even a topic of discussion.
The "Great Debate" question is whether society has totally lost its belief in itself to the extent that we no longer consider willful, cold-blooded murder a line that must not be crossed? Why would we even consider parole for the likes of a Charles Manson or Sirhan Sirhan?
IMO, not sure it should have been considered for John Hinckley, Jr. who attempted to kill former President Ronald Reagan, press secretary James Brady and two others in 1980, and who has now been approved for unconditional release. I guess I'd forgotten that he was supposedly "insane" when he made his failed assassination attempt.
IMO, not sure it should have been considered for John Hinckley, Jr. who attempted to kill former President Ronald Reagan, press secretary James Brady and two others in 1980, and who has now been approved for unconditional release. I guess I'd forgotten that he was supposedly "insane" when he made his failed assassination attempt.
That is one reason for "accidents" during arrest. Once Hinckley was in custody, there was little question that he was entitled to treatment as a mental health rather than criminal issue. His actions were totally horrific. But his motive was apparently a fascination with Jody Foster, with whom he had no relationship. Sirhan was acting on behalf of the "Palestinian" people. While it is warped to think that the misery of "Palestinian" people would be eased by killing RFK, it was not the product of mental illness.
Another example is the arrest of David Berkowitz, the "Son of Sam" murderer. Mr. Berkowitz was arrested after a year plus long rampage where he shot people, usually in parked cars late at night, at random. Allegedly, he was commanded by a 1000 year old man talking through a Labrador Retriever owned by a neighbor whose first name was Sam. Clearly the product of mental disease or defect. Just as clearly of no value to society. In the last decade we have watched Dylan Rooff, Jared Lochner and James Holmes commit massacres. They were rested at our shortly after the killings. In no case was there serious doubt about their guilt. Jared Lochner's trial was repeatedly delayed until he was medicated to the point where he was "competent" to stand trial. A lot of money on psychiatry and meds down the drain. Similarly, James Holmes, after a trial and sentencing phase somehow escaped capital punishment. It is hard to find a more horrific crime. Thankfully, Adam Lanza and Stephen Paddock died at their own hands during the massacres.
Any trial of any of these people would amount to a psychological dissection of their lives. I frankly don't care about their mental health; they were butchers.
I know we can't officially allow police officers to serve as judge, jury and executioners. The question I have is why more of these people don't perish during a struggle during arrest. Failing that why aren't they mixed with the general prison population or die during an escape attempt? Or during an "accident" during any of these processes.
That is one reason for "accidents" during arrest. Once Hinckley was in custody, there was little question that he was entitled to treatment as a mental health rather than criminal issue. His actions were totally horrific. But his motive was apparently a fascination with Jody Foster, with whom he had no relationship. Sirhan was acting on behalf of the "Palestinian" people. While it is warped to think that the misery of "Palestinian" people would be eased by killing RFK, it was not the product of mental illness.
Another example is the arrest of David Berkowitz, the "Son of Sam" murderer. Mr. Berkowitz was arrested after a year plus long rampage where he shot people, usually in parked cars late at night, at random. Allegedly, he was commanded by a 1000 year old man talking through a Labrador Retriever owned by a neighbor whose first name was Sam. Clearly the product of mental disease or defect. Just as clearly of no value to society. In the last decade we have watched Dylan Rooff, Jared Lochner and James Holmes commit massacres. They were rested at our shortly after the killings. In no case was there serious doubt about their guilt. Jared Lochner's trial was repeatedly delayed until he was medicated to the point where he was "competent" to stand trial. A lot of money on psychiatry and meds down the drain. Similarly, James Holmes, after a trial and sentencing phase somehow escaped capital punishment. It is hard to find a more horrific crime. Thankfully, Adam Lanza and Stephen Paddock died at their own hands during the massacres.
Any trial of any of these people would amount to a psychological dissection of their lives. I frankly don't care about their mental health; they were butchers.
I know we can't officially allow police officers to serve as judge, jury and executioners. The question I have is why more of these people don't perish during a struggle during arrest. Failing that why aren't they mixed with the general prison population or die during an escape attempt? Or during an "accident" during any of these processes.
The simple answer is because the police and those who work in prisons are trained to do the opposite of what you are suggesting here. If someone who is armed throws their hands in the air and drops their weapon, the authorities are trained to accept their surrender. The people who work in prisons are trained to separate high risk inmates from the general population precisely to prevent their injury and death. Its a question of professionalism and training.
In essence, they know that their job is to not act as "judge, jury, and executioner".
Situations aren't always so cut-and-dried, though.
People who commit heinous crimes like abducting, raping, and murdering children and women…mass shootings…bombings…and assassinating political leaders, deserve a one way trip to oblivion via lethal injection (when it is proven beyond reasonable doubt that they are guilty)
People who commit heinous crimes like abducting, raping, and murdering children and women…mass shootings…bombings…and assassinating political leaders, deserve a one way trip to oblivion via lethal injection (when it is proven beyond reasonable doubt that they are guilty)
CUT and DRY.
The process is too slow and expensive. That's a real problem. If we believed in ourselves it would be the same as September 6, 1901, when President William McKinley was shot at a fair in Buffalo, New York (link). Like Sirhan, Leon F. Czolgosz, the killer, a professed anarchist was arrested immediately, at the scene. McKinley died ten or eleven days later. On September 19,1901 Mr. Czolgosz stated: "What's the use of talking about that. I killed the President. I am an Anarchist, and simply did my duty. That's all I’ll say.” (link). On October 29, 1901, after a trial that began on or about September 23, 1901 Mr. Czolgosz was executed (link).
A California parole board just voted to release Sirhan on parole. To me, he was Exhibit "A" for the death penalty
California Governor Newsom denied his parole today.
SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom on Thursday refused to parole the man convicted of gunning down Robert F. Kennedy in Los Angeles, a brazen assassination of a presidential candidate that scarred the nation and altered the course of American politics during the turbulent 1960s.
A two-person state parole panel recommended in August that Sirhan Sirhan be paroled, influenced in part by two of Kennedy’s children, who have advocated for his release. Sirhan has been imprisoned for more than half a century since his conviction in Kennedy’s shooting death at the Ambassador Hotel the day after the senator won California’s 1968 Democratic presidential primary.
“Mr. Sirhan’s assassination of Senator Kennedy is among the most notorious crimes in American history,” Newsom said in a statement released Thursday afternoon. “After decades in prison, he has failed to address the deficiencies that led him to assassinate Senator Kennedy. Mr. Sirhan lacks the insight that would prevent him from making the same types of dangerous decisions he made in the past.”
On a train ride to Philadelphia for the Bicentennial Parade on July 4, 1976 I rode with two of my former high school friends, Jim and Bill. We had graduated from high school the year before. At the time all of us were died-in-the-wool Democrats planning on voting for Carter over Ford.
Keep in mind these are bright people. Jim graduated from Yale, and Harvard Law School. Bill from Princeton, and since I lost touch with him, I don't know which medical school. Looking for an intellectual topic of discussion Jim, now one of my closer friends brought upthe Supreme Court's then recent allowance of capital punishment in limited circumstances, in a decision at the close of the term in June 1976. In June 1972 the Supreme Court had abolished all capital punishment. He favored the capital punishment. Bill, the other person and I did not, favoring life without parole. Jim raised the issue that some people are just of absolutely no use to society, and were beyond rehabilitation. Bill and I felt that life without parole was sufficient.
Rewind the clock to June 5, 1968. Sirhan Sirhan had just gunned down Robert Kennedy in cold blood, in a crime he later attributed to Robert Kennedy's vote to sell 50 fighter jets to Israel. He was sentenced to death, a sentence commuted to life by the 1972 Supreme Court decision. Now, fast forward to the last several days. A California parole board just voted to release Sirhan on parole. To me, he was Exhibit "A" for the death penalty, as was Charlie Manson and his group for a famous and brutal murder spree 14 months later. Both Manson and Sirhan have had regular parole hearings.
The "Great Debate" question is whether society has totally lost its belief in itself to the extent that we no longer consider willful, cold-blooded murder a line that must not be crossed? Why would we even consider parole for the likes of a Charles Manson or Sirhan Sirhan?
California Governor Newsom denied his parole today.
Thanks for keeping me up to date. I think the fact that this is even a possibility is galling. Not that we should revert to early 20th Century values, but at least, in 1901, we had the moral certainty that McKinley's assassin could not be part of a civilized society. Now this is open to debate, a piece of moral relativism.
California Governor Newsom denied his parole today.
SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom on Thursday refused to parole the man convicted of gunning down Robert F. Kennedy in Los Angeles, a brazen assassination of a presidential candidate that scarred the nation and altered the course of American politics during the turbulent 1960s.
A two-person state parole panel recommended in August that Sirhan Sirhan be paroled, influenced in part by two of Kennedy’s children, who have advocated for his release. Sirhan has been imprisoned for more than half a century since his conviction in Kennedy’s shooting death at the Ambassador Hotel the day after the senator won California’s 1968 Democratic presidential primary.
“Mr. Sirhan’s assassination of Senator Kennedy is among the most notorious crimes in American history,” Newsom said in a statement released Thursday afternoon. “After decades in prison, he has failed to address the deficiencies that led him to assassinate Senator Kennedy. Mr. Sirhan lacks the insight that would prevent him from making the same types of dangerous decisions he made in the past.”
The killing of RFK had an impact that went far beyond his family and the people closest to him. The impact was felt by millions of people throughout our entire country. The message should be that someone who assassinates a president or presidential candidate will receive harsh punishment for doing so.
The killing of RFK had an impact that went far beyond his family and the people closest to him. The impact was felt by millions of people throughout our entire country. The message should be that someone who assassinates a president or presidential candidate will receive harsh punishment for doing so.
I wonder if he would have decided the same way if Blue State mayors and governors weren't getting very bad press for rampant crime? I think his heart wanted to release him. Things have gone so far downhill in places like San Fransisco that he's had to trim his sails a bit.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
