Oh, good grief. - Jay Maynard

> Recent entries
> Calendar view
> Friends page
> User info
> Jay's web page

Friday, 5 May 2006


Previous Entry Share Next Entry
1021 - Oh, good grief.

The Minneapolis Star-Tribune spewed yet another leftist screed, this time to comment on Zacarias Moussaoui's life sentence. I had to comment:

Oh, good grief. Not only did the Star-Tribune have to trot out the same old tired arguments against the death penalty in its editorial about Zacarias Moussaoui's sentence, but it couldn't pass up the opportunity to bash President Bush in the bargain. Bonus!

By calling the jury "courageous" in choosing not to impose the death penalty, the paper has insulted those who have made the difficult decision to impose the death penalty in other crimes. One of my good friends was in that position, and she describes it as a difficult, wrenching decision, even though the defendant richly deserved it. In the end, the defendant was executed for a cold-blooded, senseless murder.

Of course, the only kind of courage the Star-Tribune recognizes is the kind that fits its left-wing ideals. Those of us on the other end of the political spectrum act out of every sort of venal motive, but never such things as honor or courage. That would damage the carefully preserved worldview of the editorial staff just a bit too much.

If it were up to me, I'd personally strap Moussaoui to a table, start the IV as carefully as I knew how, and push the lethal drug dose, smiling at him the entire time. For some crimes, no punishment short of death is appropriate.


current mood: [mood icon] cranky
current music: The Moody Blues - The Voice

(9 comments | Leave a comment)

Comments:


[User Picture]
From:rillaspins
Date: - 0000
(Link)
I don't know....it might be a REALLY long life sharing a basement with 3 other wacko bombers. Of course, he just might get along with the abortion clinic bomber. There is, after all, no accounting for taste.
[User Picture]
From:jmaynard
Date: - 0000
(Link)
Actually, he'll effectively be in solitary confinement for life: at the prison he'll likely go to, prisoners are not allowed to interact with each other.

That doesn't matter, however, Moussaoui will live a long life, all paid for by the US taxpayer. He'll never again worry about getting a meal, or medical care, or a roof over his head. No, it won't be a picnic, but it's not the worst punishment we could inflict on him by a long way.
[User Picture]
From:phanatic
Date: - 0000
(Link)
I think it pretty much is. Don't get me wrong, I'd have no problem with the jury choosing to put him down like a rabid dog. But at the same time, I have no problem with spitefully allowing him to live out his life in captivity, given his expressed wishes to die.

And you know it costs more to execute someone than to keep him in jail for life, so the "paid for by the US taxpayer" bit's a bad argument. Besides, justice is justice, regardless of the cost; if the correct thing to do is that which costs more, then that cost should be paid.
[User Picture]
From:jmaynard
Date: - 0000
(Link)
The reason execution costs more than lifelong incarceration is that our legal system has been bent into pretzels by defendants stretching out the process by repeatedly raising arguments on appeal that are rehashings of old, rejected arguments against the death penalty. It's nearly as criminal to allow an inmate to evade punishment for 25 years by abusing the legal system as was the original crime.

Yes, justice is justice. Sometimes, justice demands nothing less than death.
[User Picture]
From:bronxelf_ag001
Date: - 0000
(Link)
phanatic said: Don't get me wrong, I'd have no problem with the jury choosing to put him down like a rabid dog. But at the same time, I have no problem with spitefully allowing him to live out his life in captivity, given his expressed wishes to die.

I agree fully with that. I don't really care if they kill him or not. However the one upside I can see to the verdict (which is neither brave, courageous or anything else. Give me a fucking break-- it's just a VERDICT. No "bravery" here...) is that it denies him the right to become a martyr.



If nothing else, that's kinda satisfying.
[User Picture]
From:rillaspins
Date: - 0000
(Link)
That was kind of my thought.

[User Picture]
From:jmaynard
Date: - 0000
(Link)
The flip side to that is that he's now a symbol to those who would follow in his footsteps: "Release Moussaoui, or we'll blow up tiis cruise ship and everyone on board!" They know damn good and well that we're not going to release him, but that won't stop them from using him.
[User Picture]
From:bronxelf_ag001
Date: - 0000
(Link)
Six of one, half dozen of the other.

I prefer personally to deny anyone their religious maryred bullshit.

I'd rather take the "or else" than the martyr to the cause. More stupid kids will be sucked in by the martyrdom. That's what these cults of fanatics are made of, after all.
[User Picture]
From:kazriko
Date: - 0000
(Link)

> go to top
LiveJournal.com