Jay, I too am a New Hampshirite (18 years) but I view things slightly differently. Druce
Jay TeaMarch 17, 2004
Rob, I mean free as in “able to do whatever he wishes without fear of consequences.” He killed, he got the ultimate sanction, and since then he’s terrorized more innocents and killed again. There is literally nothing more the state can do to him should he kill a third time. Or a fourth.
Rob, I respect your faith and your beliefs. I’m just not willing to risk any more lives on this walking piece of scum who’s already deliberately killed twice already, and has absolutely no reason to not kill again. Next time it could be a guard. And now that he’s shown that there are no other consequences, it’s just a matter of time before some other lifer decides to kill someone they don’t like.
I’m reminded of the scene in “To Kill A Mockingbird” when someone comes running in and announces there’s a mad dog in the neighborhood. Atticus Finch doesn’t negotiate with the dog, doesn’t want to treat or save the dog. It’s beyond saving. He calmly and resolutely kills the dog. He doesn’t do it out of hatred, out of vengeance, out of malice. It needed to be done, and he did it. That’s what Druce needs. He’s a mad dog who’s killed twice, and shows no signs of stopping.
J.
RobMarch 17, 2004
Jay, I have to say that your definition of “free” still doesn’t take into account that prisons have a lengthy set of sticks and carrots or that there are MANY “consequences” (feared by most) that prison officials have at their disposal. Your concept of the penal system is extremely uninformed if you think one can murder at will and nothing will happen. You also state that you’re “not willing to risk any more lives” (presumably because life holds value) but then you call for the taking of Druce’s. I too respect your beliefs, but don
Jay TeaMarch 17, 2004
Rob, I’ll defer to you on the abstract and spiritual aspects. I’ll stick to the concrete.
I’m quite comfortable with calling Druce terms such as “evil,” “animal,” “scumbag,” and “lowlife.” I’m also comfortable with going beyond what you said. You said “when someone does something as horrible as Druce.” I’ll take it to “when someone IS as evil as Druce IS.”
There is nothing — NOTHING — of substance that the state can do to Druce to punish him for his calculated murder. By extension, there is nothing the state can do to punish anyone serving life without parole who kills. Any list of sanctions you could compose would simply be fodder for an ACLU lawsuit under the “cruel and unusual” punishment. With no punishment over their heads, there is no deterrent to these inmates to behave themselves.
You’re hoping that Druce can be redeemed, despite all his history, and want to offer him (and by extension, others like him) a chance to save themselves. I agree that is possible, and would be wonderful. But while the race does not always go to the swift and the battle to the strong, that’s the way to bet. He killed once. He terrorized. He joined hate groups. Then he killed again. Quite frankly, I’m not willing to risk a third life while hoping for the best for him. He’s had numerous chances to “get right with Jesus,” or whatever higher power, and he would have many more before he was executed. But I’m tired of measuring the road to his redemption in six-foot-deep graves.
J.
(also, Rob: could you possibly break up your postings in to paragraphs? That one long, skinny column of word after word after word is difficult to parse. I eventually cut and pasted it into a wider format to follow it more easily.)
RobMarch 18, 2004
Jay,
Sorry about the formatting. I’m also sorry if I sounded preachy. That wasn’t my intention.
You’re entitled to want this man dead. It’s an opinion and it’s yours. But I still think your looking at the wrong problem – which objectivity would suggest was a failure of the prison system and its officials. If you go camping and leave food out everywhere, and then a bear comes and eats it, do you blame the bear?
I still believe that your understanding of prison is uninformed, and you really haven’t offered anything to make me believe otherwise. Have you ever read a book on prison reform? Have you ever spoken to a warden or a prison guard? How about an ex-convict who has served hard time? Can you honestly say there is NO deterrent to make these types of inmates behave?
The threat of an ACLU lawsuit is a lousy reason (or rationalization) for executing someone. So is the “risk” you keep referring to. And I’m not sure what you mean by the swift and the strong, but a “bet” seems inappropriate when we’re talking about human life – even an “evil” one.
What it comes down to is this: You are judging a man, whom you know NOTHING about, other than what you read (in a local paper? online?), who killed someone under circumstances you know NOTHING about, in a place you know NOTHING about. That may make for an easy blogpost, but it shows a real deficiency in critical thinking.
I’m not going to cry if this man loses his life, but I’m also not going to cheer.
Wow, Rob, you gave a lot of meat to pick apart, but I’m pressed for time right now, so I’ll only address one point, and that’s about leaving the food around for the bear to eat, and not blaming the bear.
We’re talking about a human here, who is supposed to be able to think critically and obey our laws. Sorry, your analogy sounds like a lot of the apologists who never want anyone to take the blame for anything, except for rich white males…especially if they’re Republicans (or is that redundant? I mean if Clinton was our first black President, and if Kerry got elected, he’d be our second…)
RobMarch 18, 2004
Jalal,
I think you missed the point of my analogy. I
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you consent to this usage.AcceptPrivacy policy
Jay, I too am a New Hampshirite (18 years) but I view things slightly differently. Druce
Rob, I mean free as in “able to do whatever he wishes without fear of consequences.” He killed, he got the ultimate sanction, and since then he’s terrorized more innocents and killed again. There is literally nothing more the state can do to him should he kill a third time. Or a fourth.
Rob, I respect your faith and your beliefs. I’m just not willing to risk any more lives on this walking piece of scum who’s already deliberately killed twice already, and has absolutely no reason to not kill again. Next time it could be a guard. And now that he’s shown that there are no other consequences, it’s just a matter of time before some other lifer decides to kill someone they don’t like.
I’m reminded of the scene in “To Kill A Mockingbird” when someone comes running in and announces there’s a mad dog in the neighborhood. Atticus Finch doesn’t negotiate with the dog, doesn’t want to treat or save the dog. It’s beyond saving. He calmly and resolutely kills the dog. He doesn’t do it out of hatred, out of vengeance, out of malice. It needed to be done, and he did it. That’s what Druce needs. He’s a mad dog who’s killed twice, and shows no signs of stopping.
J.
Jay, I have to say that your definition of “free” still doesn’t take into account that prisons have a lengthy set of sticks and carrots or that there are MANY “consequences” (feared by most) that prison officials have at their disposal. Your concept of the penal system is extremely uninformed if you think one can murder at will and nothing will happen. You also state that you’re “not willing to risk any more lives” (presumably because life holds value) but then you call for the taking of Druce’s. I too respect your beliefs, but don
Rob, I’ll defer to you on the abstract and spiritual aspects. I’ll stick to the concrete.
I’m quite comfortable with calling Druce terms such as “evil,” “animal,” “scumbag,” and “lowlife.” I’m also comfortable with going beyond what you said. You said “when someone does something as horrible as Druce.” I’ll take it to “when someone IS as evil as Druce IS.”
There is nothing — NOTHING — of substance that the state can do to Druce to punish him for his calculated murder. By extension, there is nothing the state can do to punish anyone serving life without parole who kills. Any list of sanctions you could compose would simply be fodder for an ACLU lawsuit under the “cruel and unusual” punishment. With no punishment over their heads, there is no deterrent to these inmates to behave themselves.
You’re hoping that Druce can be redeemed, despite all his history, and want to offer him (and by extension, others like him) a chance to save themselves. I agree that is possible, and would be wonderful. But while the race does not always go to the swift and the battle to the strong, that’s the way to bet. He killed once. He terrorized. He joined hate groups. Then he killed again. Quite frankly, I’m not willing to risk a third life while hoping for the best for him. He’s had numerous chances to “get right with Jesus,” or whatever higher power, and he would have many more before he was executed. But I’m tired of measuring the road to his redemption in six-foot-deep graves.
J.
(also, Rob: could you possibly break up your postings in to paragraphs? That one long, skinny column of word after word after word is difficult to parse. I eventually cut and pasted it into a wider format to follow it more easily.)
Jay,
Sorry about the formatting. I’m also sorry if I sounded preachy. That wasn’t my intention.
You’re entitled to want this man dead. It’s an opinion and it’s yours. But I still think your looking at the wrong problem – which objectivity would suggest was a failure of the prison system and its officials. If you go camping and leave food out everywhere, and then a bear comes and eats it, do you blame the bear?
I still believe that your understanding of prison is uninformed, and you really haven’t offered anything to make me believe otherwise. Have you ever read a book on prison reform? Have you ever spoken to a warden or a prison guard? How about an ex-convict who has served hard time? Can you honestly say there is NO deterrent to make these types of inmates behave?
The threat of an ACLU lawsuit is a lousy reason (or rationalization) for executing someone. So is the “risk” you keep referring to. And I’m not sure what you mean by the swift and the strong, but a “bet” seems inappropriate when we’re talking about human life – even an “evil” one.
What it comes down to is this: You are judging a man, whom you know NOTHING about, other than what you read (in a local paper? online?), who killed someone under circumstances you know NOTHING about, in a place you know NOTHING about. That may make for an easy blogpost, but it shows a real deficiency in critical thinking.
I’m not going to cry if this man loses his life, but I’m also not going to cheer.
Wow, Rob, you gave a lot of meat to pick apart, but I’m pressed for time right now, so I’ll only address one point, and that’s about leaving the food around for the bear to eat, and not blaming the bear.
We’re talking about a human here, who is supposed to be able to think critically and obey our laws. Sorry, your analogy sounds like a lot of the apologists who never want anyone to take the blame for anything, except for rich white males…especially if they’re Republicans (or is that redundant? I mean if Clinton was our first black President, and if Kerry got elected, he’d be our second…)
Jalal,
I think you missed the point of my analogy. I