SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the remembered-more-than-his-victims dept.
http://radaronline.com/celebrity-news/charles-manson-deathbed/
The end could be near for Charles Manson.
The legendary mass murderer is on his death bed at a Bakersfield, Ca. hospital, according to reports.
[...] Manson, 83, has spent much of the past year dealing with the aftermath of internal bleeding from a lesion on his intestines.
Insiders say he was admitted three days ago and "it's not going to get any better for him."
See also: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/charles-manson-grave-condition-california-hospital-article-1.3635813
http://kron4.com/2017/11/15/report-cult-leader-charles-manson-hospitalized-in-bakersfield/
Update: Charles Manson, Cult Leader Behind Tate-LaBianca Murders, Dead at 83
Charles Manson dies aged 83 after four decades in prison
The terrible charisma of Charles Manson
The human side of Charlie Manson
Charles Manson, whose cult slayings horrified world, dies
Cult leader Charles Manson dead at age 83 (2:13 video)
Original Submission #1 Original Submission #2 Original Submission #3
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 17 2017, @10:28PM (6 children)
I'll bite.
There are people in this world who are extremely dangerous. When these individuals are convicted of a crime (let's say murder) they are a danger to other inmates and the correction officers, even when kept in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day. Any and every interaction with these dangerous individuals has the potential for injury or death. These violent individuals are a better argument for the death penalty. The fact they they will harm or kill anybody simply because they want to is enough reason to accept that they forfeit their right to live.
I am not a proponent of the death penalty. I recognize that those who fear a death sentence for crimes they have committed can endanger more people - including the police - because they have nothing left to lose. But I understand that there are times when the death penalty is necessary to protect the rest of society from individuals so dangerous that we cannot trust they can be contained or controlled. These violent individuals are a better argument for the death penalty.
(Score: 2) by letssee on Saturday November 18 2017, @03:39PM (5 children)
> the death penalty is necessary
But it isn't. It's just a barbaric impulse for revenge. Most (actual) civilized societies have abolished the death penalty, and those that have ar usually the safer societies to live in.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 18 2017, @10:41PM (1 child)
That comes across as a textbook post hoc fallacy. It would be interesting to see if there is any actual data to suggest that capital punishment abolition has any effect on crime or safety, I would suspect it does not (just as most studies show its use to have negligible effect as a deterrent).
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday November 20 2017, @08:50PM
Generally speaking, the severity of the penalty always has less of a deterrent effect on crime than the odds of getting caught. And that includes the death penalty.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @07:08PM (1 child)
No, it isn't. In my case (and I am from one of those actually civilized societies), my support for the death penalty comes from the pragmatic realization that some people just can't (or don't want to) be "fixed". And around here, that fact is exacerbated by mandatory maximum-term prison sentences (in many cases under 20 years), so way too many people are set loose on the population knowing they're still a threat.
No, in my model of "justice", you get one chance to better yourself: I support a probational death penalty, in which a judge can basically declare your life (well, your old "lifestyle") forfeit. From that moment on, you can call on government resources to change your live around (counselling, rehab, basic education), but every subsequent conviction can be turned into a death penalty if the judge deems you unworthy of more government effort.
That way, we also have some control over what a single criminal can cost society.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @07:35PM
Oblig: "I AM the law!"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DannyB on Monday November 20 2017, @07:10PM
I think the AC made a good point that DID NOT involve revenge. If I were to try to summarize it concisely, I would say that there are certain individuals that are so dangerous to keep alive that we shouldn't. That criteria has nothing to do with revenge. It is based on a standard independent of what the subject did, and who he did it to. The sticky part is coming up with an objective criteria of someone that is too dangerous to keep alive. I think a better argument against the AC would have been to argue that no such criteria can be determined, which might possibly be true.
A modern approach to Agile development is called F'ing Ridiculous Agile or Fragile.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.