Lockerbie bomber released on "Compassionate Grounds"

I feel compassion towards the murderers family. I can not for a second imagine what it must be like for them, however, they now have to also pay because of his lack of regard for human life by way of not seeing him as often. And not living their lives with him, because he decided to take others lives by playing god and now he must pay with his own. Such is life. They can still see him, in prison. That's the way it has been, why change it now?
 
I sincerely wonder how many people would attend public hangings, guillotinings, etc. if they were to exist now.

I really do wonder.
 
The number would depress you.

I know; I was asking in rhetoric in a (probably) vain effort to get some people to take a second look at their own text.
 
I sincerely wonder how many people would attend public hangings, guillotinings, etc. if they were to exist now.

I really do wonder.

Most people wouldn't need to see the bastard hang. Knowing he's dead is comfort enough. I really don't understand. People don't seem to have trouble with the carnage of a plane exploding and 270 mothers, fathers, children murdered, but the idea of one man paying the ultimate price for his crimes is just too offensive. THAT is what makes me wonder.
 
Most people wouldn't need to see the bastard hang. Knowing he's dead is comfort enough. I really don't understand. People don't seem to have trouble with the carnage of a plane exploding and 270 mothers, fathers, children murdered, but the idea of one man paying the ultimate price for his crimes is just too offensive. THAT is what makes me wonder.

Maybe because the person performing the death penalty, as well as the people giving it, sink to his level, and thus become murderers and collaborators too?

And really, it isn't an "ultimate price" to some. As someone said earlier, what's the point of having a death penalty on terrorists that are prepared to blow themselves up anyway? It would be more painful for them to be imprisoned rather than killed.
 
But that has nothing to do with feeling compassion for both sides. So it wasn't really an answer to my question, just a repetition of what you've said before.

You said you didn't understand my point, so I made it clearer. If you want my opinion on compassion more clearly, I'll give you that too.

A man who committs 270 murders deserves nothing more than to rot in prison. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone with this opinion.

Clear?
 
No they don't become murderers. They become the swift arm of justice. If you take a life, you are forever taking away someone else's right to live. In my mind, in that case, unless there are extenuating circumstances, you deserve to lose yours in return.

Seriously think about it... It's such a terrible "punishment" to be able to live? To get fed square meals several times a day and get to work out and watch tv and take classes? You must be joking. That's no deterrent at all to not commit terrible crimes. That's a better life than some of the poor folks trying to make it out there.

If they want to consider themselves a martyr and their cronies back home want to erect a statue and call them a saint once he or she is dead, so be it. But there are heinous crimes that deserve death. You shouldn't get to evaporate 270 people and go about your merry way. You shouldn't get to get letters from your loved ones and better yourself and live when you robbed someone else of that.
 
Seriously think about it... It's such a terrible "punishment" to be able to live? To get fed square meals several times a day and get to work out and watch tv and take classes? You must be joking. That's no deterrent at all to not commit terrible crimes. That's a better life than some of the poor folks trying to make it out there.

If they want to consider themselves a martyr and their cronies back home want to erect a statue and call them a saint once he or she is dead, so be it. But there are heinous crimes that deserve death. You shouldn't get to evaporate 270 people and go about your merry way. You shouldn't get to get letters from your loved ones and better yourself and live when you robbed someone else of that.

But see, now we're getting into a separate argument about the nature of the death penalty, life in prison, and the concept of "death row".

I stand by my previous statements. I do not pretend to judge anyone in this forum, but I ask only would you, if given the gun/noose/axe, be willing to take the man's life yourself, as justice served for those 270 lost?

Do not be quick to answer the question, either. It should require heavy thought.
 
But see, now we're getting into a separate argument about the nature of the death penalty, life in prison, and the concept of "death row".

I stand by my previous statements. I do not pretend to judge anyone in this forum, but I ask only would you, if given the gun/noose/axe, be willing to take the man's life yourself, as justice served for those 270 lost?

Do not be quick to answer the question, either. It should require heavy thought.

Yes. And I've thought about it more than once before when this subject has come up. It's not because I'm a bloodthirsty bitch. It's not because I get off on the thought of offing someone. It's because sometimes real justice isn't pretty and isn't squeaky clean. In my mind, and in my heart, I'd know I was ridding the world of one inhuman piece of filth and that the world would be better off without a cretin like that in it. I'd do it if it gave me nightmares for the rest of my life because I'd believe in my core that it was justice.

Let me ask you this... If it was your wife, your mother in that plane... would you really be asking me this question? If it was someone you knew, you loved, are you telling me you'd be all leniency and compassion? Because if you really stop to think about it, I don't think so. It's really easy to take the moral "killing is killing" highroad when it doesn't touch you personally or the ones you hold dear.
 
Yes. And I've thought about it more than once before when this subject has come up. It's not because I'm a bloodthirsty bitch. It's not because I get off on the thought of offing someone. It's because sometimes real justice isn't pretty and isn't squeaky clean. In my mind, and in my heart, I'd know I was ridding the world of one inhuman piece of filth and that the world would be better off without a cretin like that in it. I'd do it if it gave me nightmares for the rest of my life because I'd believe in my core that it was justice.

Let me ask you this... If it was your wife, your mother in that plane... would you really be asking me this question? If it was someone you knew, you loved, are you telling me you'd be all leniency and compassion? Because if you really stop to think about it, I don't think so.

As I said before - I try not to judge others, especially when it comes to hypothetical situations.

Compassion doesn't necessarily mean I think this guy deserves to go free, because I don't.

I do know this though; I am certainly not the portrait of leniency or clemency (or even of tolerance sometimes).
 
As I said before - I try not to judge others, especially when it comes to hypothetical situations.

Compassion doesn't necessarily mean I think this guy deserves to go free, because I don't.

I do know this though; I am certainly not the portrait of leniency or clemency (or even of tolerance sometimes).

Neither am I and I do know that about myself. I guess I feel passionately about this because it hits close to home - some of them were people I knew. I guess it continually frustrates me that there are messed up things going on in this world and because it's not in our face, not in our backyard ("not our war," not our loved ones), we kind of turn away or find a way to justify it or harden ourselves to what's really going on. There's genocide going on every day in Darfur. There's sick fuckers like the 911 terrorists killing people all the time and this freak getting set free in Scotland. But we find a way to say oh isn't that horrible and then tune it out. And it's fucked up.
 
Well, the good news is that it's on some of our minds at least.
 
Yes. And I've thought about it more than once before when this subject has come up. It's not because I'm a bloodthirsty bitch. It's not because I get off on the thought of offing someone. It's because sometimes real justice isn't pretty and isn't squeaky clean. In my mind, and in my heart, I'd know I was ridding the world of one inhuman piece of filth and that the world would be better off without a cretin like that in it. I'd do it if it gave me nightmares for the rest of my life because I'd believe in my core that it was justice.

Let me ask you this... If it was your wife, your mother in that plane... would you really be asking me this question? If it was someone you knew, you loved, are you telling me you'd be all leniency and compassion? Because if you really stop to think about it, I don't think so. It's really easy to take the moral "killing is killing" highroad when it doesn't touch you personally or the ones you hold dear.

As I said myself, if I knew someone in that plane I would probably think different about this one case in particular, and I probably would shoot him personally myself. However, I still stand by my opinion that those people are in a different seat than the rest of us.
 
As I said myself, if I knew someone in that plane I would probably think different about this one case in particular, and I probably would shoot him personally myself. However, I still stand by my opinion that those people are in a different seat than the rest of us.

That is exactly my point though Uzor. Maybe the problem is that murder is an affront to all of us and should be taken personally and seriously. It could have been any of us. The guy deserves imprisonment and worse. Not to go free because he's sick.
 
I will find it very funny (well not really) if it turns out he was misdiagnosed and turns out he is not terminally ill after all. Oh man, the Scottish lawmakers will have so much egg in their faces.

I seriously believe that the death penalty has never really been a punishment for criminals who commit crimes that earn them said punishment. When you commit such a crime, you are pretty much saying you are giving up your own life as well. Unfortunately, the USA (and most other civilized nations) also do not believe in cruel and unusual punishment for those who have never the less earned it. Raesvelg came up with a good idea a few posts back, or hell, wanna kill him, ok sure, but do it the SLOW AND PAINFUL way, not quick and painless.

In the end, this man should never have walked free, he should have served his full sentence in prison even if he was terminally ill. Hell, look at one of Manson's followers, she is terminally ill with brain cancer and yet she hasn't been let go >.>
 
I seriously believe that the death penalty has never really been a punishment for criminals who commit crimes that earn them said punishment. When you commit such a crime, you are pretty much saying you are giving up your own life as well. Unfortunately, the USA (and most other civilized nations) also do not believe in cruel and unusual punishment for those who have never the less earned it. Raesvelg came up with a good idea a few posts back, or hell, wanna kill him, ok sure, but do it the SLOW AND PAINFUL way, not quick and painless.
You know, I always liked the good old days of dragged, hanged and garroted.

First you were hanged until you're just about to die, and they cut you down. Then, they tie you after a horse and drag you to the execution spot, where they cut off your genitals and burn them in front of you. Then, they cut open your stomach and drag out the intestines and burn them.

Later on, they replaced it with hanging > dragging > tieing each of your arms and legs to 4 horses, who then drag in 4 different directions until you're split.

This actually leads to a pretty funny story about Charles Sanson, who was the initial Sanson of the the Sanson Executors. They were the state executor in Paris for 6 generations. One of the Sansons had to endure a specially horrendous execution. You see, the horses this day were especially weak, so they couldn't execute him this way. After the horses had dragged for 2 hours with him shouting in pain, they had to chop his arms and legs off. The problem was, at first they missed, and as the axe was weak, it took several attempts to chop through the limbs, but when they had finally chopped both of his arms and legs of, the man was still alive, begging them to kill him. This one execution scarred him for life, and he was about to quit his job. Fun story though, is that he was also an excellent doctor, and his free time was spent healing the sick and poor. If I remember right, his name was Charles Baptiste-Sanson, and was the second one. The Sanson lineage stared with Charles Sanson and ended with Charles Sanson.

Charles Sanson was initially a wounded soldier, who were taken in to the Sanson family. Eventually he fell in love with the daughter of the family, and it wasn't until later he found out her father was the executioner of Paris. Eventually he got over his shock and decided to marry her, which her father didn't like. Eventually he agreed to let them marry, which lead to a complicated story about how became the executioner of Paris, leading to him realizing his entire lineage would be forever doomed to be executioners.

Now, you'd think they enjoyed their job as executioner and bringing justice to the people, considering some of you apparently said you'd take great enjoyment in shooting convicts in the head. However, only one of them truly enjoyed the job, and that was the second Sanson, who often followed his father to work. Two of the Sansons were also educated doctors and helped the poor, and loathed their job as executioners. One were very famous and rich, and everyone wanted to dress as him, but he still loathed the job as people still hated him. They were one of the richest families in Paris, though, and their children were forced in to the job, as it was too an important position of power and money to give up to some other family. For example, The 4th Sanson worked as a physician, until he was forced to become an executioner at the age of 15, and he loathed his father's job. Charles Henri sanson, this particular sanson, was actually the last one to perform the later version of dragged, hanged and garroted, called drawing and quartering (the one with the horses), on his first victim, Robert-François Damiens. Robert was convicted for the failed assassination of Louis XV of France.

The worst part of this all, is that Henri-clament Sanson (think it was him, was either him or his father), had to execute not only his friend, but a woman he had loved too. Both of them were innocent people, who died for no other reason than being nobles.

Edit: I forgot to mention the best part of Drawn and Quartered. First you cut small wounds over the body and pour molten metal in to them. In the case of Robert-Françuis, his hand was also burned with sulfur. After the dragging part, the limbs and torso are thrown to burn at the stake, sometime with the victim still alive.

You have to appreciate the their cruelty. Surprised they still had criminals.

edit2: the more I think about it, I think Robert was the horrible execution I talked about earlier that scarred the Sanson for life.
 
Last edited:
Hell, look at one of Manson's followers, she is terminally ill with brain cancer and yet she hasn't been let go >.>

True, but they let Squeaky Fromme out a couple weeks ago (although her crime was a bit different).
 
Last edited:
tristam the death penalty is deff a debatable issue, one that I've personally wrestled with in my head many times. personally i have no problem with the idea of him rotting in prison to a ripe old age. sometimes life in prison is worse then death. but i would never go see a public execution, and i don't see how you can draw a parallel between people upset that this mass murderer is walking free, and people going to see a public execution. most the people here arnt upset because he didnt get hung or beheaded, we're upset cause he killed 270 people and served 8 years in prison.


Also about the death penality -- whats the point in threatening suicide bombers with the death penality? :crazy:

"Terrorist 1: Lets blow ourselves up on some crowded street.
Terrorist 2: Well... lets not. We might get the death penalty."

As someone said earlier, what's the point of having a death penalty on terrorists that are prepared to blow themselves up anyway? It would be more painful for them to be imprisoned rather than killed.

the whole "death penalty wont scare suicide bombers" things is just plain horse shit. this Wasn't a suicide bomber, noone here is talking about a suicide bomber, he blew up a plane NOT himself, so obviously he wasn't eager to die himself. and i don't think anyone ever even said anything about suicide bombers getting death penalty cause OBVIOUSLY that would be retarded. don't try to paint someone who wants death penalty for a terrorist as stupid because anyone that stops and thinks about it for 5 seconds would see they obviously aren't talking about a suicide bomber.

I'm never going to see eye to eye with the ones that thinks this guy getting released is justifiable, because it just seems flat out crazy to me.

uzor don't take this the wrong way, because outside this thread I've never had any kind of problem with you. and I think your a really nice guy.

you point at this thread and say "look at the mob mentality" OFCOURSE theres gonna be people who think a guy that killed 270 people being released is bullshit. but don't try to paint people who aren't viewing things from your side of the fence as somehow less "enlightened" or "civilized" then you because they want someone to serve the sentenced they were sentenced to. The way you talk about the "right thing" as tho your some kind of authority on whats "right" is making my head spin. the way you say it, it REALLY makes you look like your up on a really high horse.
 
Back
Top