So we kill someone to show that killing someone is wrong

[WilliamPitt]

Um...?

-- One (recently former) Boston resident's opinion

I pleaded for this little shit's life some weeks ago.

Mercy Is Ours to Give, if We Choose It
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/30153-mercy-is-ours-to-give-if-we-choose-it

"There is no sense in killing someone to prove that killing someone is wrong. More than that, and at bottom, showing him the mercy he did not himself summon says, for all time and in all directions, that we are better than him, and better than that."

...alas.

[Cooley Hurd]

1. Very well-stated...

...and I agree 100%.

[Electric Monk]

85. 'toon form

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026681261

[aikoaiko]

2. Due process makes all the difference.

[avebury]

4. You cannot always rely upon due proess, just ask

Cameron Todd Willinham. Oh but you can't, they executed him.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/news-events-exonerations/cameron-todd-willingham-wrongfully-convicted-and-executed-in-texas

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/prosecutor-accused-of-misconduct-in-disputed-texas-execution-case/2015/03/18/caa37050-cd77-11e4-8a46-b1dc9be5a8ff_story.html

[trumad]

5. Hence my absolute opposition to the DP.

Some try to say....well...I'm for it if the crime is heinous or...there is proof beyond a resonance doubt.

I'm certain that some thought those qualifications matched Willinham.

When you mention to some that innocents have been put to death.. what say you? They say...well its not perfect but it's for the greater good.

I say what!

[avebury]

10. I also am totally against the death penalty.

First of all I am just flat out anti death penalty. In addition, people cannot trust the justice system in this country, both police and prosecutors. Mark Furhman wrote a really good book, Death and Justice, about 10 DP cases in Oklahoma County during the era of D.A. Bob Macy and discredited Director of OKC Police Dept. Crime Lab, Joyce Gilchrist.

Given a mistrust of the justice system you have to consider Scalia's attitude that, later proof of innocence is not sufficient to stop the execution of a person if that person had a full and fair trial. The concept of "full and fair trial" is totally at question because I no longer think that society can expect that full and fair trials are guaranteed.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/08/17/56525/scalia-actual-innocence/

This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is “actually” innocent. Quite to the contrary, we have repeatedly left that question unresolved, while expressing considerable doubt that any claim based on alleged “actual innocence” is constitutionally cognizable.

[daleanime]

18. +1

[skepticscott]

39. My reply to people who say that

is "Do you think that the death of a certain number of innocent people is an acceptable price to pay for making sure that no people guilty of especially heinous crimes escape the death penalty? If so, would you be willing to be one of the innocent people who is arrested, tried, convicted and executed? Or do you think only other people should pay the price you think is acceptable and necessary"?

What this exposes is the underlying thinking of such people, that the wrongly convicted are always bad people anyway and that they can rationalize their deaths by convincing themselves that they were probably guilty of something else, even if not the particular crime they were executed for. It could never happen to them.

[trumad]

49. I think people do not think the whole thing through..

I tell them this angle thinking they may see the light and change their mind. They don't. ..which disturbs me big time.

[aikoaiko]

13. That's a different issue than the one WP is trying to discuss I think.

His questions presumes we have the correct person as we do in the Boston Bomber case.

He questions whether it is appropriate to kill someone to show that killing some is wrong.

The difference is that society considers the bombing murder, but the execution legal because of due process.

[Logical]

32. You must love china, iran, iraq.......check the list that do and the ones that don't. nt

[aikoaiko]

37. I'm not familiar with their legal systems and due process in DP cases

[unblock]

48. no amount of due process justifies the cold-blooded, premeditated, and unnecessary killing of humans

others have pointed out that due process isn't perfect, but even if it were, at best it makes sure that the prisoner is actually guilty and that the execution wasn't done in haste. i.e., it was a carefully thought out, planned, deliberate killing of another human being.

i'm not a pacifist, i'm not going to object to killing in legitimate self-defence, war circumstances, etc.

but the killing of a prisoner, when life imprisonment without parole is a perfectly legitimate alternative, is simply outright murder. the focusing on due process and the guilt of the prisoner is beside the point. no matter what the crime, not matter how certain we are that he did it, no matter how little remorse the prisoner felt, he's still a human being and it's murder to kill him in cold blood.

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. No it does not

The court system is broken and innocent people sit on death row.

[avebury]

3. That pretty well sums it up.

Now if you want to make some heads explode (as in those who are blood thirsty for his death) all you have do is talk about how merciful they are being in handing out the death penalty is in this instance. Why merciful? At his age, he could live in isolation for decades under less then ideal circumstances. Instead, he will be granted what is supposed to be a merciful death, become a martyr at the same time, and the extremists will be riled up - again. For those who state he will end up in hell - who knows. Hell may be just as imaginary as heaven.

The death penalty is barbaric and solves nothing but to act as a balm to those who are just as barbaric. It becomes harder and harder all the time to try to claim, with a straight face, that the US is a first world country.

[yallerdawg]

6. Justice is holding the right person accountable.

Mercy is not committing another murderous barbaric act.

[DFW]

7. If there could be a number above 100% spot on, this would deserve it.

If allowed to be carried out, this sentence makes about as much sense as the so-called "pro-life" people who both eat meat and shoot down doctors at family planning clinics (or, at least, approve of the action).

[JonLP24]

8. I can appreciate fact-based, rational, logical reasons for a DP

such as Billy "the Ghoul" reasons for supporting the DP but not the blood thirsty kind, those ones really give me the creeps. Its like when I saw a documentary or a story on a state executioner who quit, unless you're a sociopath it especially doesn't feel right when you're the one turning on the switch.

Reading Texas death penalty case, mainly the controversial ones, I can't remember which individual this was but in addition to maintaining his innocence the last group of people he was around facing the same fate, he said the DP sends a message that whether you learn or grow, improve as an individual, learn from it or not the state says it doesn't matter. If this guy becomes disillusioned later in life with the groups that influenced him (with the use of propaganda) we're just missing out on opportunity to learn to better be able to counter the propaganda & equal rights. Too often enforcement or reaction just creates more terrorism "Oppression is the incubator of terrorism". Or he could be a sociopath just as much as any of those terror leaders, just think he bought into the BS, false hopes, & false promises not saying he shouldn't be punished but focusing on the opportunity costs from executing him.

[Thinkingabout]

9. I thought he was sentenced to death for his crime.

[DFW]

12. He was sentenced to death. There's not even much doubt over his guilt

I think the discussion here was about whether or not we want to be a country that employs ritual killing as a penalty for killing.

Hammurabi would approve, as does present-day Iran, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, China, Indonesia, and a few select non-states such as ISIS and Boko Haram.

The implied question we are requested to ask ourselves is whether or not that is the kind of company we want our country to be keeping on such an important social issue. I would hope that "Eh, maybe not" would at least be a starting point for that discussion.

[polmaven]

11. I completely agree!

I will never understand how killing someone for killing someone will prove that killing someone is wrong! It simply makes NO sense to me. and I do not want it done ---in MY name, which is what will happen!! He will be killed in all of OUR names!
(Hence the reason for my long standing tag line)

[Katashi_itto]

14. I have nothing against the death penalty. In this case. I would have preferred Life. Why?

Because he would have been entombed in the living death of Supermax.

The death penalty is actually being merciful.

Life in Supermax would have consigned him to fifty years plus of the living hell of solitary confinement and certain madness.

Much more brutal.

[sammythecat]

40. Why not include a year of torture before drawing and quartering?

That would be even more brutal. That's all I have, but maybe we could have an online contest to see who could come up with the most brutal form of punishment and then do that. The winner, family included, could get an all expense paid trip to witness all the brutality no matter how long it took.

I can understand and empathize with the feelings of rage and desire for brutal justice a victim might have, I'm fully capable of that myself, but that is exactly why we don't allow victims to sit in judgment and I don't like the idea of the state, i.e. society, inflicting tortuous punishment.

[Katashi_itto]

43. Are you against the death penalty?

[Katashi_itto]

45. No, a year of torture is nothing compared to being entombed the rest of your life.

[LordGlenconner]

46. So what is his punishment?

You don't believe in the death penalty (I don't either) but you also seem to believe life in prison is too cruel.

Should someone just give him a stern talking to and ask him not to do it again?

[Katashi_itto]

50. WTH are you talking about?

I am not against the death penalty. I thought in this case death was to easy on him in comparison to life entombed.


Friggin read what I said, damn it.

Jesus.

[LordGlenconner]

51. Maybe if your points were more coherent

But carry on.

[Katashi_itto]

53. Maybe if someone's reading comprehension actually existed.

[mitch96]

42. totally agree

SuperMax is worse than death. Slowly going insane by your self 23 hrs a day...

[In_The_Wind]

15. Killing is wrong. Let the man rot in jail remembering the suffering his actions caused.

[steve2470]

92. [phone] nt

[Donald Ian Rankin]

16. I think you're being deliberately obtuse. Killing innocent people is wrong.

Last edited Sat May 16, 2015, 09:58 AM - Edit history (1)

There's nothing hypocritical, or even complicated, about the idea that killing most people is wrong, but killing murderers isn't.

It's a line of argument so obviously obtuse that it would not last 10 seconds if used outside of an echo chamber.

For what it's worth, I'm strongly against the death penalty, not because I think that killing murderers is always wrong (although I think it usually is), but because it will inevitably be sometimes wrongly applied (see above comment on killing innocent people).

But this disingenuous attempt to pretend not to see the difference between killing murderers and killing innocents is neither intellectually honest, nor going to change anyone's mind.

[PosterChild]

21. Bingo! Thanks! /nt/

[FLPanhandle]

29. +1

Killing isn't considered wrong per se.

Were the soldiers storming Normandy wrong for killing the defending Germans?

Some people consider abortion a killing and "wrong" in their moral view; many don't.

Assisted suicide is killing; some consider that "wrong"; many don't.

The same goes for the DP. Some may consider it "wrong", fine, that's their moral view. Others don't depending on the circumstances.

These silly "turn off your brain and spout a bumper sticker slogan" arguments are not convincing.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

47. Were the soldiers storming Normandy wrong for killing the defending Germans?

No. But if the soldiers killed prisoners who were not a threat, the soldiers were guilty of war crimes.

(That's not to say it didn't happen)

[Logical]

33. Amazing how other progressive countries realize it is wrong. And you and the USA don't. nt

[Donald Ian Rankin]

36. Did you even bother reading my post? N.T.

[Logical]

61. Did you fucking read your post.....

"but killing murderers isn't"

You said killing murderers isn't wrong.

France, Canada, the UK, Etc think it is.

You, Iran, China, Etc think it isn't.

What did I not understand???

[Donald Ian Rankin]

75. "What did I not understand???" Pretty much the whole thing.

Go back and reread. I especially commend the third paragraph to your attention.

[Logical]

77. Another clueless post.....

Do you realize about one person a year is released from death row?

Do you have a clue about the innocence project?

So your brilliant logic is for the judge to ask "are you really really super duper sure he committed this murder?"

Either you are for the government killing people or are against it. You are for it. So stop making shit up.

[abakan]

17. I oppose capital punishment 99.99% of the time.

I think they should strap a bomb to this nasty piece of offal and set it off.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

26. And the precedent?

The only way to avoid executing innocent people is never to execute anyone. Every execution sets a precedent for more executions, with more casual standards.

Life in prison is a perfectly reasonable sentence.

[malthaussen]

19. Why not? I was suspended from school for not going to school.

Criminal penalties are not intended to be logical, or we would have thieves serve indentures to their victims, not lock them in a small box at taxpayer expense.

-- Mal

[PosterChild]

23. Interesting observations, thanks! /nt/

[TreasonousBastard]

25. One of the toughest pro DP arguments to argue against...

It does presuppose that we don't see every human life as equal in value; but we don't in practice anyway no matter how many times we say we do.

It also dispenses with most of the concepts of "justice" that we like to spout off about.

A lot of this hinges on the ideas of "penalties" and why and when they should be applied-- it makes no sense for one state to let the Green River Killer live after close to a hundred random murders but other states kill off their killers.

And we haven't even begun to ask whether a government's killing bin Laden or a head of Isis are really a necessary military operation or an over-the-top police action.

[malthaussen]

30. I was just saying that our country's priorities are screwed up.

I remember video of the crowd going wild at the baseball game when bin-Laden's death was reported, chanting "USA! USA!" No matter that we were involved in two pointless wars, with thousands if not millions of innocent civilians being massacred in our name... the dirty low-down murdering "terrorist" was dead, so somehow that "proved" that we were Number One. As if there weren't (and aren't) about ten thousand other more important things to worry about.

I am slightly in favor of the DP on the grounds that it at least keeps the odd killer from ever killing again, but obviously our justice system is so fraught with deficiencies that it is a damned weak argument. As a "deterrent," the DP is obviously useless, and can easily lead to "as well hung for a sheep as a lamb" situations.

In my psychotic moments, I wish for a legal system where 1) One lawyer argues both sides of the case, and 2) penalties are assigned by the victim or his survivors. I'm not completely convinced that such a system would be materially worse than the one we have, even if at the same time we do have to accept that our system is better than nothing.

-- Mal

[TreasonousBastard]

54. My mistake-- missed the intended irony there...

It has been proposed that the DP might actually increase the murder rate, since it might encourage killing all potential witnesses in addition to the intended victim. I don't take that seriously, but it does give a hint how strange the debate gets.

Maybe 30 years ago the New Yorker had a piece about how every 25-30 years we American tended to revise our justice system back and forth between punishment and rehabilitation. It was as if every generation saw the failure of the previous attempt, but also missed the problems of the one before that. The point was that we never learn.

[malthaussen]

63. A lot of years ago, Larry Niven wrote a short story...

... in which serious criminals were incarcerated and forced to relive their crimes daily. There are a number of people who favor prison sentences for offenders because hanging isn't good enough for them, they should be forced to face the shame of their actions.

My assessment of human nature is that there are a good few people who are not only not ashamed of egregious crimes, they're proud of them. And I think "making them pay" is just vengeance flying different colors, and vengeance doesn't help anybody. I suppose it gives some people a warm and fuzzy feeling of empowerment -- "USA, USA!" -- but it's never done much for me. Pest control, okay, and I would extend the death penalty to cover a few more crimes than it does, but IMO on the whole our prison system is just another way to warehouse the masses of people our society can find no use for. It would be nice if we could have a way to separate the truly evil from the simply desperate or pissed off. And I do believe there is such a thing as true evil -- there is a difference between killing someone because he killed your brother, and killing somebody because you want to watch something die. Mental illness? It is a condition that defines itself, if we just tag everybody as "sick" whom we don't understand. An ideal criminal justice system would serve the public by improving things, not by creating even more division and alienation.

I believe that so long as our culture continues to define "strength" as the ability to force your will on other people, we will have violence as the first resort of the incompetent. Asimov, you may recall, said that violence was "the last resort of the incompetent," but he was wrong about that, IMO. It's the last resort of the competent.

-- Mal

[secondvariety]

20. Stick him in the

deepest, darkest hole in the prison system for life. Killing him will make him a martyr.

[Thespian2]

22. Well said

But we will never hear the state admit that they are simply murdering the guilty to prove...something...
His death will not reclaim the dead from his actions...His death will not deter the next insane person who chooses to kill others...If they intend to put him to death, at least call it what it is...murder...

[MH1]

24. I'm opposed to the death penalty on principle, but I don't think that's the reason it's imposed.

Oh, some people might think that's the reason, or at least a good rationale for it, but I don't think that's the real reason at all.

Mostly it is supposed to be for the last vestige of "an eye for an eye" - you kill someone, you should die too. You took something from me, I get to take it from you.

I think most sentient people know the "deterrence" argument fails in practice, so that's not the reason. People kill for whatever reasons, but if it isn't in the throes of some passion or mental illness but is instead planned, they also plan to get away with it.

Some people think it is wrong to feed, clothe, and house a multiple murderer for decades. But with the death penalty this happens anyway, so it is a weak argument - except possibly for someone as young as this little terrorist, who will certainly exhaust his appeals and have his sentence carried out before he lives to a ripe old age in prison, unless the US puts a moratorium on the d.p. or fails to acquire the means to do it within the law (as Rachel was discussing last night). The way this country is going, I think the chance of a moratorium is very low, and sooner or later the calls for blood will be loud enough to fix the stupid issue of how to do it. (Utah, amazingly, got this one right. If you're going to have the d.p., firing squad is no worse than other ways that have been used, and much simpler and cheaper to implement.) So the chances are pretty good that it will overall cost taxpayers less to put this terrorist to death than to keep him in prison for the rest of his life.


I'm against the death penalty on principle because

* we are giving someone the JOB of killing a defenseless, restrained human being. I think that's wrong, even if there's a strong argument that the person to be killed deserves it. I think "executioner" is a job description that should not be imposed on anyone.
* it's irrevocable, and has tended to be applied to innocent people, and people who killed under circumstances that should be mitigating. Once you green-light the death penalty, it gets applied in many more cases than just those extremely heinous and deserving cases that d.p. advocates like to use as examples.


All that said, I'm disappointed that Tsarnaev got the death penalty, but it's not going to be high on my list of miscarriages of justice. In a short time I could come up with probably a dozen examples of really awful d.p. verdicts. This wouldn't be one of them.

[Ms. Yertle]

27. I am 99% against the death penalty

The only cases where I support it is when the alternative is 70 years in Supermax. In that case, the dp is much less cruel.

There should be another alternative. Something that would give even the most heinous of criminals a reason to get up in the morning.

[Fred Sanders]

59. Your position is unprincipled.

[Ms. Yertle]

73. Really??

Because I think that a lifetime in supermax--solitary confinement, limited contact with any other human beings (even prison guards,) never being allowed outdoors, being moved from place to place like a vicious animal--is worse than the dp, you consider my position to be "unprincipled?"

If and when Tsarnaev is put to death, the utmost care will be taken to ensure a quick and painless death. OTOH, life in a supermax is year after year, decade after decade of unmitigated torture.

Obviously, life in prison with access to some socialization (even with rapists and murderers,) a prison job, outdoor recreation, and other diversions would be preferable. That option was not on the table for him.

[Fred Sanders]

81. Your advocacy for torture is indeed principled, but it is very wrong.

[Ms. Yertle]

88. How am I advocating FOR torture?????????????? n/t

[TexasBushwhacker]

28. All the reasons DP supporters use just don't work

1. They say that the death penalty is a deterrent, yet we have hundreds of prisoners on death row. Thousands of murders are committed every year. Some deterrent!

2. They say it saves money because we don't have to pay to incarcerate them, but forget the appeals process ends up costing much more. It cost the state of Florida millions of dollars to execute Ted Bundy, because of his appeals.

3. They cite something from the Bible like "an eye for an eye". They don't cite "Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord."

4. They say the occasional execution doesn't matter because most of the inmates on death row are guilty. So how many innocent prisoners do we have to execute to make them change their mind?

Frankly, I don't think it's mercy to let someone rot I prison. I think it's the ultimate punishment.

[Logical]

34. DP supporters just love revenge. nt

[raouldukelives]

38. Exactly. It is the ultimate punishment. nt

[ucrdem]

31. I'm with you on this one.

Our man Morsi too, who briefly replaced our man Mubarek in Egypt. But I suppose dead men tell no tales.

[Orsino]

35. How else is he gonna learn?

Think, people.

[donco]

41. I’d happily stuff his

ass with C-4 and ignite it…from a distance of course.

[Trajan]

57. Brutal personality. ..

The few posts I have read from you are all about killing, maiming, and all around mayhem ...

Tell me: What Liberal-Progressive philosophy explains the wondrous benefits of death and mayhem? ... I would like to understand the foundation of your .... Liberal Blood Lust ....

[NuclearDem]

66. WOOOOOOO MANLY AMERICA BONER!!!!!!

[Warren DeMontague]

84. I'm gonna second that "fuck him". If that makes me a manly American boner intertubes tough guy

I dont care.

See, here is Dzhokar Tsarnaev, about to set his backpack full with the shrapnel-laden bomb down, right next to several children watching a race. The 8 year old boy is dead. His 6 year old sister "only" had her leg blown off.




Sort of hard to tell from the picture, but he appears to be laughing.

So yeah. Fuck that guy. because of manly american boners, or something.

[NuclearDem]

87. Not about Tsarnaev.

More about the borderline Yosemite Sam YEEHAWness towards the death penalty.

[Warren DeMontague]

89. i find it hard to separate the sentiment in this case from the shitty thing he did.

i dont see a lot of yee haw around the DP, under normal circumstances.

[DirkGently]

52. There's no good answer in a case like this.

My usual problem with the death penalty is that we do a notoriously terrible job of deciding who is guilty in horrific cases, and locking someone up at least allows for the possibility of a later correction to the injustice, which happens (fortunately or unfortunately) all the time.

What about a case like the Boston bombings, though? There is no question of guilt, or malice. There is no reasonable expectation of rehabilitation. Is it really that much more "just" or "compassionate" to lock up a 20-year-old boy / man for the next 60 years? To spend millions, keeping him alive without hope and subjecting him to all the miseries prison entails?

Maybe?

I don't know. I don't like executions either, but we're not clear as a civilization just what it is we're trying to accomplish when we catch someone like this. Rehabilitation of someone who maimed children and murdered strangers, then chuckled about "those people sure got cooked?" Permanent status as a caged, purposeless human being subject to any number of horrors -- including a reasonable possibility of being assaulted or murdered -- in prison?

He has to go away because we can't trust him to live among people. There's no good way to do that. Neither death nor prison is virtuous or merciful on our part. But we have to remove the threat he has proven himself to be.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

56. Anders Breivik

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik

On 22 July 2011, Breivik bombed government buildings in Oslo, which resulted in eight deaths.

Within a few hours of the explosion he arrived at Utøya island, the site of a Norwegian Labour Party youth camp, posing as a police officer in order to take the ferry to the island, and then opened fire on the unarmed adolescents present, killing 69.[63][64][65] The youngest victim was Sharidyn Svebakk-Bøhn of Drammen,[66] who was 14 years old.[67] Another victim was Trond Berntsen, the step-brother of Crown Princess Mette-Marit (the son of Princess Mette-Marit's late stepfather).[68]

On 24 August 2012 Breivik was adjudged sane and sentenced to containment—a special form of a prison sentence that can be extended indefinitely—with a time frame of 21 years and a minimum time of 10 years, the maximum penalty in Norway.[104] Breivik's lead counsel Geir Lippestad confirmed that his client would not appeal the sentence.[27]

The court stated that "many people share Breivik's conspiracy theory, including the Eurabia theory. The court finds that very few people, however, share Breivik's idea that the alleged 'Islamisation' should be fought with terror."[105]

[Fred Sanders]

58. Folks are too stupid, or lazy, to understand the difference between retribution and revenge, is my theory.

Criminal sentences can reflect societies revulsion to the crime without itself committing the ultimate revulsion.

[elleng]

60. Exactly.

My #2 reason for opposing death penalty. #1 is, we/states might be WRONG! (Clearly not the case re: Tsarnaev, but OFTEN the case elsewhere.)

[Oktober]

62. Killing the wrong person is wrong...

And sometimes the most ethical choice is to kill the right person..

[hunter]

64. For every criminal we execute, we should execute a random death penalty supporting politician.

Side by side, simultaneously.

If a death penalty supporting President or Governor's number comes up in that lottery, so be it.

It would be a great show. Put it on national television.

I'd be a Most Excellent Emperor of the U.S.A.... and I'm against the death penalty.

[FLPanhandle]

67. Or for every Life without Parole criminal, we should also sentance a random anti-DP politician

Side by side, next door cells in a SuperMax.

Make for a much longer running reality show.

[hunter]

70. That sound good too.

[liberal_at_heart]

65. Modern society does not allow for mercy or for peace. I wish it did.

Those things are considered weak. Even the Democratic Party which used to champion peace is now just as hawkish as the Republican Party. It is a sad time we live in, but we can continue to be the voice of peace and of mercy even if no one else will listen.

[AZ Progressive]

68. Death is not a deterrent for someone who wants to die

I never understood this, a life of misery is worse than death. If these people want revenge, life in solitary confinement is as harsh a punishment as one could get.

[LittleBlue]

69. Lingzi Lu died with her intestines in her hands

The jury was also clearly moved when Jinyan “Helen” Zhao, an aunt of Lu, talked about the family’s decision to bury her in Boston. She said most Chinese families cremate their loved ones, but Lu’s mother thought her daughter, a Boston University graduate student, loved Boston so much that she should remain here, even if not alive.

“How she died and why she died — it just felt like she was part of Boston, part of the city,” Zhao said. “[They] just felt she should be here.”

Zhao said that Lu’s parents had their daughter buried wearing a tiara and a pink, wedding-style dress, and included in her coffin a music box and some favorite books.

Zhao said Lu was the family’s only child, and her decision to come to Boston was something her parents struggled to accept. But once they did, they scraped together the money to send her to graduate school.

“I could tell she was really appreciative of what her parents did for her,’’ Zhao testified.

In an anecdote that brought laughter from jurors, Zhao recalled how Lu was a tiny woman with an appetite so large that she once consumed an entire apple pie, spoonful by spoonful.

“I wondered, ‘Is she going to finish the whole pie?’ And she did,’’ said Zhao, who spoke to Lu on a weekly basis.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/04/22/sentencing-phase-dzhokhar-tsarnaev-trial-set-resume-wednesday/QbdLyqpiKfWvfaqLrrKnqJ/story.html

Zhou’s organs were spilling out of a gash on her stomach. She pushed her insides back in while she tried to calm Lu down. Afraid that screaming might waste what was left of her energy, Zhou waited for an ambulance in silence.

By the time Boston Police Officer Lauren Woods found Lu, she was alone.

“Her whole body was shaking quivering. She had vomit in her hair, eyes were rolling in and out,” Woods called. She stuck her fingers down Lu’s throat, trying to clear the vomit. Others came to try to help with chest compressions.

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2015/03/11/linzi-lu-tsarnaev-trial/

TL;DR Lingzi Lu was the only child her family had, due to the one-child policy. They wanted to send their daughter to a Chinese uni, but she wanted to live in America. Her parents relented and put their savings toward sending her to Boston U. She died in terror with her organs spilling out of her stomach. Her parents put her trust in us as a nation to protect her and we let in some radical fuckwits like the Tsarnaev brothers to take her life and ruin her family.

I save my sympathy for those wrongly accused. Genuinely I hope his execution is botched so he can experience a tiny fraction of what Lu went through in her final moments. We all watch war criminals like Cheney and Bush walk around free, these drone operators the Obama administration allows to vaporize families, all without any possibility of justice. At least this one guy is getting what he deserves. It isn't about revenge for a lot of us, just the need for some sense of karmic justice.

[liberal_at_heart]

71. I'm sorry but what you have described is revenge. It is natural to feel anger and want to

hurt those who have hurt people, but it does not change what happened and it does not keep it from happening again. It is this idea of revenge that usually keeps the war fueled. Whether it is gang wars in inner cities or conservatives that want to kill Muslims or Israelis and Palestinians who continue to kill each other it is usually done out of revenge and all it does is continue the killing. It's like taking a shot of heroin or smoking a cigarette. It gives a temporary high. It makes us feel good for a few moments. Then it just creates more chaos and destruction.

[LittleBlue]

72. I don't think killing Tsarnaev fuels any war

This isn't war. He's a mass murderer. No retribution will be had from his deserved death.

To me, I don't think it is just to allow him to live out his natural life when he inflicted horrible ends on other people. He's getting mercy by lethal infection. Retribution would be a hanging, drawing and quartering. That is equivalent to what the Boston victims experienced.

I oppose the death penalty only on the grounds that there is a possibility of an innocent person being killed. That isn't possible here. The only outcome from his death will be a body in an unmarked grave somewhere. His own uncle thought he was scum

[Trajan]

74. I oppose the death penalty ...

Because if it's wrong to kill, it's wrong to kill, period ...

Could you be the executioner? ...

It is awful how people die ... human beings have a natural aversion to discussions of guts and organs being anywhere but where they are supposed to be ... but let's not let our natural disgust with those facts cloud our sense of an ethical self ... Emotional vengeance comes from a dark place and leads us to even darker places in our human soul. ..

[liberal_at_heart]

76. You are right. When we allow ourselves to give in to revenge we let the darkness take over and that

can lead to even darker things down the road.

[Peregrine Took]

78. 'Had the chance to show him we are better than that

but our need for revenge was greater.

[liberal_at_heart]

79. Our default setting is base instinct such as fear, anger, hate, revenge. It takes effort to get off

our default setting and live out of compassion, forgiveness, and love. Many people are comfortable living on instinct rather than putting in the effort to forgive and love. Our base instincts tell us it is more gratifying to hate and take revenge rather than forgive and love. Forgiveness and love hold long term gratification which is something our society is not very good at. We want that instant gratification.

[BeanMusical]

82. +1 Well said.

[F4lconF16]

80. Sorry, but after your last post on this issue

I have a hard time believing in your compassion for the man.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026476142

You don't want him dead because of your opposition for the death penalty. Fair enough, but let's not pretend it's out of mercy.

[NuclearDem]

91. I've read the article, and I can safely say that position hasn't changed.

Only difference is that position--wishing someone to suffer the agony of losing everyone and everything he has ever cared about repeatedly for all eternity--is now being called--you guessed it--mercy.

[Warren DeMontague]

83. I'm wondering where all the people went who said anything more than 10 years would be "inhumane"

"Oh, in Scandanavia they'd give him a maximum 3 years in an air conditioned hotel room with a playstation, and then after weekly meetings with a therapist he would be rehabilitated and released into society. They're so much more civilized, you see"

Now everyone seems to want him to to be in prison with no chance of parole, but a couple weeks ago there was a crowd here tearing their hair out over the unfairness of just such an idea.

[niyad]

86. "foolish notion" by holly near

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=fPZKu6wqG_o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=b1eZhEvg3iM

Holly Near - Foolish Notion Lyrics

!

Why do we kill people who are killing people
To show that killing people is wrong
What a foolish notion
That war is called devotion
When the greatest warriors are the ones that stand for peace

War toys are growing stronger
The problems stay the same
The young ones join the army
While general what's-his-name
Is feeling full of pride
That the army will provide
But does he ask himself. . . . .

Death row is growing longer
The problems stay the same
The poor ones get thrown in prison
While warden what's-his-name
Is feeling justified
But when will he be tried (when justice is denied)
For never asking why…

Children are so tender
They will cross the earth if they think they are saving a friend
They get drawn in by patriotic lies
Right before our eyes
They leave our home
And then they find out once they're all alone
They're asking the age old question
Why?

Read more at http://www.songlyrics.com/holly-near/foolish-notion-lyrics/#i2TxzBIA7K3ylME3.99

[NuclearDem]

90. There are right ways and wrong ways to be against the death penalty.

Everything I read in that article--sparing Tsarnaev the death penalty because you don't think it's cruel enough--is the absolute wrong way.