Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 04:48 PM Apr 2013

If proven guilty do you think the bomber should get the death penalty?

I say he deserves it but I could not personally vote for it because I am against the death penalty. I have no sympathy for this guy whatsoever. I know as a Christian I am supposed to forgive but I feel no mercy towards this guy. I would only vote against the death penalty because I would not want his death on my soul.

He is an evil person and he must be punished. I say put him in jail for life if proven guilty and throw away the key.

144 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
If proven guilty do you think the bomber should get the death penalty? (Original Post) hrmjustin Apr 2013 OP
NO. cali Apr 2013 #1
No... I've ALWAYS been opposed to DP and that is not going to change. hlthe2b Apr 2013 #2
Nope...I am opposed to the death penalty nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #3
How many people executed after a lawful trial Riftaxe Apr 2013 #68
You should look up the meaning of the word nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #69
etymology is hardly my major failing Riftaxe Apr 2013 #126
No. egduj Apr 2013 #4
Probably not dookers Apr 2013 #5
Which I think is a fate worse than death penalty Dorian Gray Apr 2013 #134
No DJ13 Apr 2013 #6
That's assuming he has a conscience. RC Apr 2013 #41
No. We are progressives. NYC_SKP Apr 2013 #7
Yeah I could not personally vote for it but I think he still deserves it. hrmjustin Apr 2013 #10
Nope. nt ZombieHorde Apr 2013 #8
No sarisataka Apr 2013 #9
No alcibiades_mystery Apr 2013 #11
No jberryhill Apr 2013 #12
Well, I'm a death penalty opponent but putting on an Mutiny In Heaven Apr 2013 #13
You're not a DP opponent if Control-Z Apr 2013 #31
Poor wording on my part (tired!) Mutiny In Heaven Apr 2013 #47
You had me scratching my head! Control-Z Apr 2013 #76
No. I think there's too much to be learned from him Warpy Apr 2013 #14
I'm against the dealth penalty in general Bradical79 Apr 2013 #15
This message was self-deleted by its author devilgrrl Apr 2013 #16
No. avebury Apr 2013 #17
I want to say that I am shocked at scalia for saying that but I am not. hrmjustin Apr 2013 #19
No. Control-Z Apr 2013 #18
That is a good point. hrmjustin Apr 2013 #21
No. 99Forever Apr 2013 #20
I don't care if he does or not tularetom Apr 2013 #22
No! silverweb Apr 2013 #23
OMG I bet that senator likes to pluck the wings off of flies. Talk about a creep. hrmjustin Apr 2013 #24
Why am I not shocked Joel Anderson wants to do this nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #71
My condolences. silverweb Apr 2013 #137
Yup... nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #142
I figured that. silverweb Apr 2013 #143
No. Sheldon Cooper Apr 2013 #25
No. Blue_In_AK Apr 2013 #26
No GitRDun Apr 2013 #27
No. scarletwoman Apr 2013 #28
What we think... atreides1 Apr 2013 #29
No union_maid Apr 2013 #30
No. And MA is not a DP state. smirkymonkey Apr 2013 #32
Isn't this a federal case? Control-Z Apr 2013 #35
He will be tried under federal law. BainsBane Apr 2013 #36
I didn't realize that, but still opposed to giving him the death penalty. smirkymonkey Apr 2013 #65
Yes. Zax2me Apr 2013 #33
If the death penalty served as a deterrent, Aristus Apr 2013 #38
But they want to die in a certain, heroic way. Not as a prisoner in a monkey suit... Honeycombe8 Apr 2013 #77
Link to where this was a jihadist act? morningfog Apr 2013 #97
Absolutely not. nt Zorra Apr 2013 #34
No. I wish him a long, long life. Behind bars for the rest of it. Aristus Apr 2013 #37
No death penalty in Mass. Jennicut Apr 2013 #39
It is federal because of terror charges. hrmjustin Apr 2013 #40
No. Phentex Apr 2013 #42
Nope, no one should. bettyellen Apr 2013 #43
No. I oppose the death penalty. MotherPetrie Apr 2013 #44
Life imprisonment in a supermax with no parole. . . DinahMoeHum Apr 2013 #45
No. Assuming he is found guilty, he should receive life without the possibility of parole. nt madinmaryland Apr 2013 #46
That does not mean he will not get out on parole. Many have. Cleita Apr 2013 #50
Sorry. I just assumed that there would be at least four counts of murder in addition to the madinmaryland Apr 2013 #70
No. PeaceNikki Apr 2013 #48
I'm opposed to the death penalty. Cleita Apr 2013 #49
No. I would like to hear what this kid zeeland Apr 2013 #51
Of course not Uzair Apr 2013 #52
First let me welcome you to DU Uzair and we are happy to have you here. hrmjustin Apr 2013 #55
No due to being against the death penalty but also no treestar Apr 2013 #53
I'll wait for the trial. GeorgeGist Apr 2013 #54
No. rug Apr 2013 #56
Yes. Domestic terrorism is treason. MrSlayer Apr 2013 #57
I think you read the constitution like fundies read the Bible TheKentuckian Apr 2013 #73
Yes, they are. MrSlayer Apr 2013 #83
No, it is not treason nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #74
Yes, it is. MrSlayer Apr 2013 #80
No it is not. Treason implies working for a foreign power, a known state actor nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #86
I'm not sure a non-citizen can be convicted of treason. But yes, the death penalty is called for. Honeycombe8 Apr 2013 #78
He's not a non-citizen. MrSlayer Apr 2013 #81
Which makes him a citizen nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #87
There are different categories of citizenship. bluedigger Apr 2013 #103
And for that reason Speaker of the House and Senate Leader nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #106
Iwas actually wondering about that. bluedigger Apr 2013 #124
Those two, when you have a member of the cabinet nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #128
I was born a broad, I mean abroad, like McCain, so I'm good to go. bluedigger Apr 2013 #135
How can you conclude that from what I wrote? MrSlayer Apr 2013 #104
I heard on TV he's a "permanent resident" immigrant. I found the definition. Honeycombe8 Apr 2013 #89
The older brother nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #90
Ahh. I did not know that. So the older brother didn't seek citizenship? Interesting.nt Honeycombe8 Apr 2013 #92
He did, was denied due to a domestic Dispute nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #111
Ahhh. Interesting. nt Honeycombe8 Apr 2013 #118
I will admit it nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #129
I don't think you quite understand the law of treason. morningfog Apr 2013 #98
I don't think YOU do. MrSlayer Apr 2013 #99
Here are the elements: morningfog Apr 2013 #114
When did you become a lawyer? DainBramaged Apr 2013 #110
Let me help you: morningfog Apr 2013 #112
Help yourself DainBramaged Apr 2013 #116
Poor you. You didn't even take my offer to educate yourself. morningfog Apr 2013 #117
No, you're the one who is poorer tonight DainBramaged Apr 2013 #119
Did you even read the elements of treason? morningfog Apr 2013 #120
No, it isn't. Spider Jerusalem Apr 2013 #102
Yes, it is. MrSlayer Apr 2013 #109
No, it isn't. There's a difference between what happened in Boston... Spider Jerusalem Apr 2013 #113
NO! nt s-cubed Apr 2013 #58
No. Worried senior Apr 2013 #59
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2013 #60
+1 Signature alcibiades_mystery Apr 2013 #62
No. nt frogmarch Apr 2013 #61
Nope... Junkpet Apr 2013 #63
Welcome to DU Junkpet! hrmjustin Apr 2013 #84
Thank you! Junkpet Apr 2013 #144
No. Mosby Apr 2013 #64
Just chop his limbs off... Don't kill him. backscatter712 Apr 2013 #66
Weekly porcine transfusions. n/t cherokeeprogressive Apr 2013 #88
Become as inhuman as the murdering scum. 99Forever Apr 2013 #93
Yes Riftaxe Apr 2013 #67
Yes! I will personally bust a cap in his crown! ohiosmith Apr 2013 #72
No nobodyspecial Apr 2013 #75
No. No support for state sanctioned murder from me, under any circumstances. idwiyo Apr 2013 #79
No. Life in prison, no parole. nt City Lights Apr 2013 #82
no. morality isn't convenient. La Lioness Priyanka Apr 2013 #85
No marions ghost Apr 2013 #91
NO - he's too young - and frankly the picture we have of him so far is a bit mind boggling Douglas Carpenter Apr 2013 #94
That is not a recent picture. MADem Apr 2013 #141
No !!! WillyT Apr 2013 #95
No. No one deserves death as a punishment. Never. morningfog Apr 2013 #96
welcome rehabiti Apr 2013 #100
YES! Carolina Apr 2013 #101
Yes. n/t zappaman Apr 2013 #105
No - I am unequivocally against the death penalty... (nt) petronius Apr 2013 #107
NO .. I would like to see him locked up. forever. No possibility of parole. littlewolf Apr 2013 #108
No. nt LWolf Apr 2013 #115
Exile him to Mars for the remainder of his life? LiberalFighter Apr 2013 #121
Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2013 #122
Exile him to live with Lindsey Graham for life? LiberalFighter Apr 2013 #123
It's a pointless discussion. He WILL be found guilty and he WILL be executed. Nine Apr 2013 #125
How about putting him in a place where he'll never see the sun again DainBramaged Apr 2013 #127
No. Hell Hath No Fury Apr 2013 #130
with tou rehabiti Apr 2013 #131
no, let him spend the rest of his Long Life in Prison knowing that's all his life is now JI7 Apr 2013 #132
No... ileus Apr 2013 #133
Thank you for your reasponses! hrmjustin Apr 2013 #136
Nope. Iggo Apr 2013 #138
If convicted, let him rot in prison forever, worse in my opinion than CP nt steve2470 Apr 2013 #139
Fry 'em! BluegrassDem Apr 2013 #140
 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
3. Nope...I am opposed to the death penalty
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 04:51 PM
Apr 2013

It has zero deterrence, it's expensive to boot, and it is morally reprehensible.

That sad, likely, unless he becomes the most cooperative guy ever, and there are a series of extenuating circumstances, he will get it.

 

RC

(25,592 posts)
41. That's assuming he has a conscience.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 05:56 PM
Apr 2013

Or admits to himself that he even did something wrong.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
12. No
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 04:56 PM
Apr 2013

I think we could have learned a lot about psychology by continued study of Tim McVeigh and other people who somehow become driven by nutty ideas to do stuff like this.

Mutiny In Heaven

(550 posts)
13. Well, I'm a death penalty opponent but putting on an
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 04:57 PM
Apr 2013

analytical cap for a moment, I would say that it would depend. What sort of pull did his brother have other him? What does he have to say for himself? If - assuming a Federal trial - we get a remorseless killer who relishes in the responsibility of his actions, he's going to be executed whether I like it or not.

If, on the other hand, he is found to be a weak boy in thrall to his brother, I would hope prison is the result. I know Lee Boyd Malvo was younger, but the power of elder influence can be every bit as immense as it was to people who ended up following David Koresh and Marshall Applewhite off the end of the Earth.

Control-Z

(15,681 posts)
31. You're not a DP opponent if
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 05:39 PM
Apr 2013

you say "that it would depend". The rest of your post makes perfect sense, though, and I agree with it.

Mutiny In Heaven

(550 posts)
47. Poor wording on my part (tired!)
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 06:23 PM
Apr 2013

Last edited Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:34 PM - Edit history (1)

I think it's clear what I was trying to say, but I did a good job of muddling my own opinion with how I view the legal possibilities.

Warpy

(110,913 posts)
14. No. I think there's too much to be learned from him
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 04:58 PM
Apr 2013

on how a passive, directionless teenager gets radicalized by anyone.

I've always been against the death penalty.

 

Bradical79

(4,490 posts)
15. I'm against the dealth penalty in general
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 04:58 PM
Apr 2013

I'm not going to shed a tear over this guy for any reason, but I think there are too many flaws with the death penalty as punishment to justify its use.

Response to hrmjustin (Original post)

avebury

(10,946 posts)
17. No.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 05:01 PM
Apr 2013

Use of the death penalty makes us just as bad as the criminals. It is not a deterrent and there have been too many cases where death row inmates have later been found to be innocent. The legal system is too flawed to prevent innocent people from ending up on death row. Once the person is executed, it is too late to undo any injustices.

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

Scalia says there’s nothing unconstitutional about executing the innocent.

Almost two decades ago, Troy Anthony Davis was convicted of murder and sentenced to die. Since then, seven of the witnesses against him have recanted their testimony, and some have even implicated Sylvester “Redd” Coles, a witness who testified that Davis was the shooter. In light of the very real evidence that Davis could be innocent of the crime that placed him on death row, the Supreme Court today invoked a rarely used procedure giving Davis an opportunity to challenge his conviction. Joined by Justice Clarence Thomas in dissent, however, Justice Antonin Scalia criticized his colleagues for thinking that mere innocence is grounds to overturn a conviction:

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.

So in Justice Scalia’s world, the law has no problem with sending an innocent man to die. One wonders why we even bother to have a Constitution.

 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
19. I want to say that I am shocked at scalia for saying that but I am not.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 05:05 PM
Apr 2013

Scalia is such an icky person! I agree with you on the death penalty 100% but if this guy gets it he will deserve it. I just don't think the government should kill someone after saying killing is wrong.

Control-Z

(15,681 posts)
18. No.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 05:05 PM
Apr 2013

No death penalty. It's barbaric. I feel like our country sinks a little lower every time an execution takes place.

99Forever

(14,524 posts)
20. No.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 05:06 PM
Apr 2013

Life without parole works just fine. Our government shouldn't be in the business of killing people.

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
22. I don't care if he does or not
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 05:08 PM
Apr 2013

He deserves it but maybe not as much as the guy who owned the fertilizer plant in Texas and killed a shitload of his own employees because of his fucking greed.

silverweb

(16,402 posts)
23. No!
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 05:09 PM
Apr 2013

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]Life in prison without possibility of parole, subject to study by scientists. Let the rest of his miserable life contribute to our understanding of criminality in all its permutations.

Also... not to change the subject, but for California DUers, you might be interested in what's happening regarding the California death penalty.

While many states are moving towards abolishing the death penalty (like the rest of the civilized world), California State Sen. Joel Anderson (R) has proposed legislation to bring back the gas chamber. Not only that, he wants it to work by suffocation rather than cyanide, displacing oxygen with nonlethal gas. Unbelievably, the California District Attorney's Association supports this bill (SB 779).

SAFE California has a petition opposing this huge step backwards in the administration of justice in our state, as well as a campaign of letters to district attorneys around the state. Please feel free to participate and share.

Oppose Gas Chamber Executions in California!

silverweb

(16,402 posts)
137. My condolences.
Sun Apr 21, 2013, 03:01 AM
Apr 2013

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]I didn't look up his district. He represents East County? They seem to elect the most obnoxious reTHUGs at all levels.

silverweb

(16,402 posts)
143. I figured that.
Sun Apr 21, 2013, 01:08 PM
Apr 2013

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]Just forgot to mention it. It goes along with the rest of his profile. Prototype for a stereotype. He's straight from the mold.

atreides1

(16,046 posts)
29. What we think...
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 05:37 PM
Apr 2013

...isn't relevant, what does the law provide for in cases like this...what will the prosecutor seek as a punishment for the charges filed?

You say he deserves death but then you admit to your own inability to vote for it because it might have place some type of black mark against your soul...I won't tell you what that makes you, because it would be considered a personal attack

As for you being a "Christian" and yet admit to feeling no mercy toward this man, perhaps you might want to reconsider your idea of what a Christian is supposed to be!

 

smirkymonkey

(63,221 posts)
32. No. And MA is not a DP state.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 05:40 PM
Apr 2013

I am of the mind that he was a follower. Not that it makes him any less guilty, he should be punished to the full extent of the law, but I think his brother was the truly evil one.

BainsBane

(53,003 posts)
36. He will be tried under federal law.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 05:45 PM
Apr 2013

And there is a federal death penalty. I am personally opposed to the death penalty.

 

Zax2me

(2,515 posts)
33. Yes.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 05:42 PM
Apr 2013

I think it would assist in deterring like-minded jihadists who are thinking of planting bombs around Americans including children.

Aristus

(66,096 posts)
38. If the death penalty served as a deterrent,
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 05:51 PM
Apr 2013

Texas would have the lowest violent-crime rate in the world.

Take a walk in downtown Houston at 2am some night, and then get back to me about the death penalty being a deterrent to crime.

And since you mentioned jihadists, don't forget: most of them want to die. They want to be martyrs to their cause. I see no reason why we should assist them in this regard.

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
77. But they want to die in a certain, heroic way. Not as a prisoner in a monkey suit...
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:02 PM
Apr 2013

closed up for years in a small cell with nothing to do and in social isolation. And then shuffled down the hall in chains, in their little monkey suits, while people look on and he's given a shot. Not very dramatic or heroic, and since it's years after their "brave" act, they are all but forgotten by then.

Aristus

(66,096 posts)
37. No. I wish him a long, long life. Behind bars for the rest of it.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 05:48 PM
Apr 2013

When he dies, very, very old, alone and forgotten, I want him to ruminate before the darkeness falls on him forever; and I want him to realize that it wasn't worth it. And that he threw away any kind of meaningful life he might have had.

So not "to the death', but "to the pain".

It means we leave him in anguish, wallowing in freakish misery forever.

Jennicut

(25,415 posts)
39. No death penalty in Mass.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 05:52 PM
Apr 2013

None in New England except NH. CT ended death penalty last year, though it is not retroactive. The two men that killed a mother and her two daughters in my hometown of Cheshire in a home invasion will still be put to death. I have mixed feelings about that. I would say that case was more horrific (rape, molestation, being burned to death, strangulation) then the bombings. Alhough a child died in Boston, he was not specifically targeted.

DinahMoeHum

(21,737 posts)
45. Life imprisonment in a supermax with no parole. . .
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 06:18 PM
Apr 2013

would be a far worse and more effective punishment than death for a self-righteous fanatic who has no remorse or forgiveness of heart.

The death penalty is not harsh enough and that loser would welcome it as martyrdom.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
50. That does not mean he will not get out on parole. Many have.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 06:34 PM
Apr 2013

To make it stick he needs to get a life sentence for every death he's responsible for and it needs to be consecutive and not concurrent. That way if he comes up for parole on one of his life sentences, the next one kicks in, or so they tell me anyway.

I have an acquaintance, who has a relative who killed 21 people that the police know about. He was sentenced to 21 life sentences. He's never getting out and has been in prison now for 35 years and he's in his seventies.

madinmaryland

(64,920 posts)
70. Sorry. I just assumed that there would be at least four counts of murder in addition to the
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 07:37 PM
Apr 2013

hundreds of counts of assault and whatever they can come up with. I figured it went without saying that life without possibility of parole meant exactly that.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
49. I'm opposed to the death penalty.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 06:26 PM
Apr 2013

He should be punished with many consecutive life sentences. Let's see about five is the count I have right now. That will make sure he never gets out on parole.

 

Uzair

(241 posts)
52. Of course not
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 06:39 PM
Apr 2013

Nor should anyone else convicted of any crime.

When are people gonna get off of this shit?

 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
55. First let me welcome you to DU Uzair and we are happy to have you here.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 06:43 PM
Apr 2013

Second I agree with your view on the death penalty but since it is an emotional issue you will never hear the end of it anytime soon.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
53. No due to being against the death penalty but also no
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 06:40 PM
Apr 2013

due to age, and pending what may come into evidence. Even if one thinks the DP appropriate for an advanced society, someone this young should only be subjected to it if he is completely lacking in remorse and says he is glad he did it and would do it again.

 

MrSlayer

(22,143 posts)
57. Yes. Domestic terrorism is treason.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 06:47 PM
Apr 2013

Treason is the only crime specifically mentioned in the Constitution. The penalty, according to the Constitution, is death.

Follow the Constitution.

TheKentuckian

(24,949 posts)
73. I think you read the constitution like fundies read the Bible
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 07:53 PM
Apr 2013

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."

The penalty is spelled out as death, it says Congress declares the punishment, further, acts of terror are not by definition acts of treason.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
86. No it is not. Treason implies working for a foreign power, a known state actor
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:36 PM
Apr 2013

Even if these guys had provable links to a terror group, they are still non state actors

Words have very specific meanings. This one does not mean what you want it to mean

It is terrorism, which can get you the DP in a federal court.

It is using WMDs which can do the same.

These guys did not raise in open insurrection, which is the other definition of treason under American law.

Likely you'll get that pound of flesh though

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
78. I'm not sure a non-citizen can be convicted of treason. But yes, the death penalty is called for.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:07 PM
Apr 2013

No reason he should continue to eat good food, wear clean clothes, watch tv, play cards, exercise, have friends, have a life of sorts.

But life in prison will do, if that's the way they go.

I'm sure they're looking into sending him to Guantanamo, if he has terrorist ties, although that would be controversial.

bluedigger

(17,077 posts)
103. There are different categories of citizenship.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:09 PM
Apr 2013

You know you can't be President, right? That's really the only distinction.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
128. Those two, when you have a member of the cabinet
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:38 PM
Apr 2013

Let's say. Secretary of State, as in Kissinger, he would automatically be passed over.



Beyond those three, sky is the limit.

Some folks (will never pass) have suggested removing those limitations since it takes otherwise qualified people off the ballot as it were. It was funny when Rs entertained that for five seconds due to Arnie

 

MrSlayer

(22,143 posts)
104. How can you conclude that from what I wrote?
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:09 PM
Apr 2013

The subject line says "he's not a non-citizen" which means that he is indeed a citizen.

Come on.

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
89. I heard on TV he's a "permanent resident" immigrant. I found the definition.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:43 PM
Apr 2013
Permanent Resident Alien

An alien admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident. Permanent residents are also commonly referred to as immigrants; however, the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) broadly defines an immigrant as any alien in the United States, except one legally admitted under specific nonimmigrant categories (INA section 101(a)(15)). An illegal alien who entered the United States without inspection, for example, would be strictly defined as an immigrant under the INA but is not a permanent resident alien. Lawful permanent residents are legally accorded the privilege of residing permanently in the United States. They may be issued immigrant visas by the Department of State overseas or adjusted to permanent resident status by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in the United States.


http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=9a1f95c4f635f010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=b328194d3e88d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCRD

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
111. He did, was denied due to a domestic Dispute
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:14 PM
Apr 2013

He beat the significant other.

This afternoon Barackobama (Dzu'er) and Chris Van Zandt came up with the possible motive. Due to that denial he could not box for the US in the Olympics, and for good reason did not want to represent Russia.

After he was denied his life seemed to go to hell.

Yes, I was reading the post as Van Zandt was offering the same

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
129. I will admit it
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:41 PM
Apr 2013

If you got a green card you need to remain squeaky clean if you plan on citizenship. I would not be posting here, or going to marches, or be a reporter if I still had a green card...it can be removed with no recourse whatsoever for any reason.

 

morningfog

(18,115 posts)
120. Did you even read the elements of treason?
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:20 PM
Apr 2013

If you did, you would agree that it is a hard case to make with the given circumstances. I am sorry you either can't be bothered to read a helpful link or are incapable of comprehending what you read.

ETA: I saw your big tough guy thread got hidden, lol. Rough night for the machismo, huh?

 

Spider Jerusalem

(21,786 posts)
102. No, it isn't.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:09 PM
Apr 2013
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.


Treason is narrowly defined. Terrorism is a criminal act. In this instance, a criminal act which was specifically not aimed at overthrowing the US government, levying war against the US, et cetera. You're apparently ignorant of the Constitution.
 

Spider Jerusalem

(21,786 posts)
113. No, it isn't. There's a difference between what happened in Boston...
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:14 PM
Apr 2013

and bombing that targets a military or government office or installation. The latter would qualify as treason and "an act of war"; what happened in Boston does not. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Worried senior

(1,328 posts)
59. No.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 06:53 PM
Apr 2013

I can see that some crimes are so horrendous that it's only human to want to see the villain dead but I still do not believe in the death penalty.

 

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)
60. Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 06:53 PM
Apr 2013

Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you. Friedrich Nietzsche

Junkpet

(40 posts)
63. Nope...
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 07:06 PM
Apr 2013

...and let's assume he's guilty because, frankly, there's really no question about it. Though I don't think there should be a possibility that he ever takes another free breath, I don't believe the death penalty should be used in this case. For one, assigning him to death has potential to elevate him to martyrdom in the eyes of his sympathizers. Rather than his death seen as a deterrent against future acts of terrorism, it may actually become a catalyst. Secondly, this boy is an extremely valuable asset. Primarily for the information that he has that directly relates to the Boston Marathon, he and his brother's radicalism, others involved and any other potential threats/cells that threaten us. Who knows, however, if there are other ways he may be used.

Personally I think the death penalty talk from the AG and other top level government bureaucrats is heavy right now so there is room for negotiation once the defending attorney gets involved. The need for us to know more about the details of this travesty should outweigh our bloodlust for revenge.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
66. Just chop his limbs off... Don't kill him.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 07:27 PM
Apr 2013

Last edited Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:26 PM - Edit history (1)

Though you may have to bring in someone from Saudi Arabia to help with that.

Let the punishment fit the crime!

Riftaxe

(2,693 posts)
67. Yes
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 07:33 PM
Apr 2013

The recidivism rate for terrorists who enjoy such slaughter is exactly 0 after being executed. The murder rate of people sentenced to life in prison is significantly higher.

 

La Lioness Priyanka

(53,866 posts)
85. no. morality isn't convenient.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:33 PM
Apr 2013

i think its immoral to kill people when humane options are available. this doesn't change because a person was a terrorist or some other random criterion

marions ghost

(19,841 posts)
91. No
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:45 PM
Apr 2013

It makes no sense to kill to illustrate that killing is wrong.

Also too many innocents have been executed.

Life without parole is a bad enough sentence.

Douglas Carpenter

(20,226 posts)
94. NO - he's too young - and frankly the picture we have of him so far is a bit mind boggling
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:57 PM
Apr 2013


AP/Boston Regional Intelligence Center

I'm making a guess that he was motivated in large part by a romanticized image of the heroic Chechen fighter - a folklore that he was likely raised on - and then led and shaped into this particular action by an older brother who he likely worshipped - He ended up doing something that he would have never otherwise dreamed of doing. Something I suspect he will regret for the rest of his life.


How else would you explain a 19 year-old boy who was captain of his high school wrestling team, who volunteered for community projects on a number of occasions, who everyone who knew him describes him as a really, really nice kid, who had lots of friends, who was reported to have always been upbeat and friendly, who appeared to everyone to be completely assimilated and Americanized and who no one - absolutely no one = recalls him ever, even once expressing any ill will whatsoever toward America, who seemed far, far more interested in sports and rap music than in politics or religions - just why, just why would someone like that get involved in something like this?

littlewolf

(3,813 posts)
108. NO .. I would like to see him locked up. forever. No possibility of parole.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:11 PM
Apr 2013

he will be in SHU (segregated housing unit), because if he was in Gen Pop
he would be dead. SHU gets out of their cell for 1 hour per day 45 minutes for
exercise and a 15 minute shower. at least at NC state level, not sure about Fed time. and NC state policy states they only have to have exercise 3 times per week.
but we do it daily because, if something came up and we were unable to provide
exercise 1 time, we still met policy.

let him sit and remember what it was like to be free, and how it feels to have
your life completely controlled by others, who really doesn't give a sh*t about you
or what you want.



Response to hrmjustin (Original post)

Nine

(1,741 posts)
125. It's a pointless discussion. He WILL be found guilty and he WILL be executed.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:34 PM
Apr 2013

I will not be celebrating that day, but I won't be shedding tears either. If I had it in my power, I would abolish the DP. But I don't have it in my power. I don't consider the DP absolutely immoral, but I do think society would be better without it. And if the death penalty is going to be used on anyone, it should certainly be used on this person.

DainBramaged

(39,191 posts)
127. How about putting him in a place where he'll never see the sun again
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:36 PM
Apr 2013

hear music again


smell flowers again


see a woman again


where it's hot or cold and nothing in between



Maybe that will give the families of the dead and injured some comfort.


But I have a feeling that feeling sorry for this turd is gaining momentum here and elsewhere, and it disgusts me.

 

Hell Hath No Fury

(16,327 posts)
130. No.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:49 PM
Apr 2013

I do not believe in the DP -- it reeks of Old Testament vengeance. I think he needs to spend a very long time thinking about what he did, preferably with a photo of Martin Richard holding his "No more hurting people" sign in the cell with him. Hopefully he may one day come to a place where he can be part of the solution instead of the problem.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»If proven guilty do you t...