New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Boston Marathon bomber gets death penalty....

Since the drugs for lethal injection are scarce, maybe the State of Mass. will use "smothered in bacon grease" as a means of administering the death penalty.
 
This conclusion was foregone but, it's too bad he couldn't be left to rot in jail as we picked apart his brain.

I'm not a big fan of the death penalty but it's hard to gripe about it when it's given to some punk who plants bombs next to the legs of little kids.
 
Some will say they don't really give a shit WHY he would do something like that. I say the fact of his doing it, is reason enough for us to question why.
 
Some will say they don't really give a shit WHY he would do something like that. I say the fact of his doing it, is reason enough for us to question why.

Hey, why do ISIS savages saw off peoples' heads and burn them alive in cages?

There is no rational explanation for some things. It's just intense hate coupled with a complete disregard for human lives.
 
Does he get 72 virgins if he gets executed?

A jury has condemned Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev to death for his role in killing four people and wounding hundreds more.

Well, I must say that I am pleasantly surprised by the jury in this case. I had written them of as your usual pansy arsed, whining liberal who would likely find some excuse why he was just a mal-adjusted youth. I guess even those kind have their limits of the heinousness of an act they will tolerate.
While I don't always support the death penalty ( I think far too many people are convicted in circumstantial cases and with less than stellar representation for it to be fair) I have no problem in enforcing it when the case is absolutely iron clad as this one was.

connie
 
Well, I must say that I am pleasantly surprised by the jury in this case. I had written them of as your usual pansy arsed, whining liberal who would likely find some excuse why he was just a mal-adjusted youth. I guess even those kind have their limits of the heinousness of an act they will tolerate.
While I don't always support the death penalty ( I think far too many people are convicted in circumstantial cases and with less than stellar representation for it to be fair) I have no problem in enforcing it when the case is absolutely iron clad as this one was.

connie

We are in rare agreement. We should celebrate with champagne.

;-)
 
Does he get 72 virgins if he gets executed?

A jury has condemned Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev to death for his role in killing four people and wounding hundreds more.
I view this primarily from a utilitarian view. What benefit would come from executing him, versus what benefit would come from locking him up for life in a supermax without possibility of parole? Most of the studies I've seen suggest that there don't tend, as a practical matter, to be meaningful taxpayer savings for executions, thanks to the more extensive appeals processes. So, what's left?

The benefits I can see to locking him up for life:

(1) It deprives the Jihadist movement of a martyr. There's something a lot less sexy about a criminal who sits moldering in a cell until he's a decrepit old man than someone who goes to the gallows at his peak and can be imagined to be in paradise with his virgins. Thus, the life sentence is more likely to be a deterrent than the execution.

(2) There's always the possibility that at some future point he could be of use to society if he's alive. For example, maybe after cooling his heels in solitary for a year or two, he'll be so starved for excitement that he'll start spilling his guts about co-conspirators or secret terrorist networks, just for the human interaction. Or maybe in the future some brilliant psychologist will come up with a new theory about what really drives terrorists --a theory we could use to combat terrorism more effectively-- but in order to form and test that theory he needs some real, live jihadis of various types in custody, to interview and test (maybe there's even some physical brain defect that makes a person more likely to become a terrorist). Or perhaps he could even have a jailhouse epiphany and want to use the rest of his life to steer others away from terrorism, producing some valuable propaganda for us.

(3) Keeping him alive makes us look less bloodthirsty and may make it slightly harder to argue that we're the Great Satan. If we show at least a little mercy even to subhuman scum like him, it's harder to convince people that we're the ruthless monsters they make us out to be. And that may hurt terrorist recruiting efforts.

With those benefits to keeping him alive, and no clear benefits to killing him, I wish the verdict had come back in favor of life in prison without possibility of parole.
 
Hey, why do ISIS savages saw off peoples' heads and burn them alive in cages?

There is no rational explanation for some things. It's just intense hate coupled with a complete disregard for human lives.

because Θ armed them in Syria
 
I view this primarily from a utilitarian view. What benefit would come from executing him, versus what benefit would come from locking him up for life in a supermax without possibility of parole? Most of the studies I've seen suggest that there don't tend, as a practical matter, to be meaningful taxpayer savings for executions, thanks to the more extensive appeals processes. So, what's left?

The benefits I can see to locking him up for life:

(1) It deprives the Jihadist movement of a martyr. There's something a lot less sexy about a criminal who sits moldering in a cell until he's a decrepit old man than someone who goes to the gallows at his peak and can be imagined to be in paradise with his virgins. Thus, the life sentence is more likely to be a deterrent than the execution.

(2) There's always the possibility that at some future point he could be of use to society if he's alive. For example, maybe after cooling his heels in solitary for a year or two, he'll be so starved for excitement that he'll start spilling his guts about co-conspirators or secret terrorist networks, just for the human interaction. Or maybe in the future some brilliant psychologist will come up with a new theory about what really drives terrorists --a theory we could use to combat terrorism more effectively-- but in order to form and test that theory he needs some real, live jihadis of various types in custody, to interview and test (maybe there's even some physical brain defect that makes a person more likely to become a terrorist). Or perhaps he could even have a jailhouse epiphany and want to use the rest of his life to steer others away from terrorism, producing some valuable propaganda for us.

(3) Keeping him alive makes us look less bloodthirsty and may make it slightly harder to argue that we're the Great Satan. If we show at least a little mercy even to subhuman scum like him, it's harder to convince people that we're the ruthless monsters they make us out to be. And that may hurt terrorist recruiting efforts.

With those benefits to keeping him alive, and no clear benefits to killing him, I wish the verdict had come back in favor of life in prison without possibility of parole.

he should be worm food before the [Unwelcome language removed] crows twice
 
I view this primarily from a utilitarian view. What benefit would come from executing him, versus what benefit would come from locking him up for life in a supermax without possibility of parole? Most of the studies I've seen suggest that there don't tend, as a practical matter, to be meaningful taxpayer savings for executions, thanks to the more extensive appeals processes. So, what's left?

The benefits I can see to locking him up for life:

(1) It deprives the Jihadist movement of a martyr. There's something a lot less sexy about a criminal who sits moldering in a cell until he's a decrepit old man than someone who goes to the gallows at his peak and can be imagined to be in paradise with his virgins. Thus, the life sentence is more likely to be a deterrent than the execution.

(2) There's always the possibility that at some future point he could be of use to society if he's alive. For example, maybe after cooling his heels in solitary for a year or two, he'll be so starved for excitement that he'll start spilling his guts about co-conspirators or secret terrorist networks, just for the human interaction. Or maybe in the future some brilliant psychologist will come up with a new theory about what really drives terrorists --a theory we could use to combat terrorism more effectively-- but in order to form and test that theory he needs some real, live jihadis of various types in custody, to interview and test (maybe there's even some physical brain defect that makes a person more likely to become a terrorist). Or perhaps he could even have a jailhouse epiphany and want to use the rest of his life to steer others away from terrorism, producing some valuable propaganda for us.

(3) Keeping him alive makes us look less bloodthirsty and may make it slightly harder to argue that we're the Great Satan. If we show at least a little mercy even to subhuman scum like him, it's harder to convince people that we're the ruthless monsters they make us out to be. And that may hurt terrorist recruiting efforts.

With those benefits to keeping him alive, and no clear benefits to killing him, I wish the verdict had come back in favor of life in prison without possibility of parole.

There is nothing but expense in locking him up...
Frankly it will take twenty years to get him to the execution chamber anyway.

JO
 
Hey, why do ISIS savages saw off peoples' heads and burn them alive in cages?

There is no rational explanation for some things. It's just intense hate coupled with a complete disregard for human lives.

Stop it...you're forcing me to agree with you too much!
 
Well, I must say that I am pleasantly surprised by the jury in this case. I had written them of as your usual pansy arsed, whining liberal who would likely find some excuse why he was just a mal-adjusted youth. I guess even those kind have their limits of the heinousness of an act they will tolerate.
While I don't always support the death penalty ( I think far too many people are convicted in circumstantial cases and with less than stellar representation for it to be fair) I have no problem in enforcing it when the case is absolutely iron clad as this one was.

connie
His confession written inside the boat are what helped seal his fate:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/ma...as-captured/h7xFrSTXKT6L4Euc8N5bEN/story.html
I’m jealous of my brother who

ha [hole] ceived the reward of jannutul Firdaus (inshallah)

before me. I do not mourn because his soul is

very much alive. God has a plan for each person.

Mine was to hide in his boat and shed some

light on our actions I ask Allah to make me a

shahied (iA) to allow me to return to him and

be among all the righteous people in the highest levels

of heaven.

He who Allah guides no one can misguide

A [hole] bar!

I bear witness that there is no God but Allah

and that Muhammad is his

messenger [hole] r actions came

with [hole] a [hole] ssage and that

is [hole] ha Illalah. The U.S.

Government is killing our innocent

civilians but most of you already

know that. As a M[hole] I can’t

stand to see such evil go unpunished,

we Muslims are one body, you hurt

one you hurt us all, well at least that’s

how Muhammad (pbuh) wanted it to be [hole] ever,

the ummah is beginning to rise/awa [hole]

has awoken the mujahideen, know you are

fighting men who look into the barrel of your

gun and see heaven, now how can you compete

with that. We are promised victory and we

will surely get it. Now I don’t like killing

innocent people it is forbidden in Islam

but due to said [hole] it is allowed.

All credit goes to [hole].
 
Back
Top