Ft. Hood Shooter Sentenced

Nidal Hasan sentenced to death for Fort Hood shooting rampage in the first death sentence of an active duty soldier in 52 years.

Does he deserve the sentence? 

Well that's just great. They have a new martyr. 

Well that's just great. They have a new martyr. 

Jebus213

That does not mean it will be carried out now does it? 

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

Well that's just great. They have a new martyr. 

WhiteKnight77

That does not mean it will be carried out now does it? 

wut?

Way to go America, one of the only 1st world countries to still sport the death penalty. Time to get rid of it. ferrari2001

[QUOTE="ferrari2001"]Way to go America, one of the only 1st world countries to still sport the death penalty. Time to get rid of it. Capitan_Kid

hee hee

Way to go America, one of the only 1st world countries to still sport the death penalty. Time to get rid of it. ferrari2001

Multiple counts of pre-meditated murder? Of course this is the proper sentence, I wouldn't have it any other way. [QUOTE="ferrari2001"]Way to go America, one of the only 1st world countries to still sport the death penalty. Time to get rid of it. TheGrat1

one costs more, and is irreversible

Way to go America, one of the only 1st world countries to still sport the death penalty. Time to get rid of it. ferrari2001

Way to go America, one of the only 1st world countries to still sport the death penalty. Time to get rid of it. ferrari2001

One is death and the other isnt.Capitan_Kid

one costs more, and is irreversible

lostrib

And?

In response to irreversibility: I'm not a "death penalty, every time all the time" guy. But when the guilt is this obvious "he admitted it", and the crime is this heinous, why not?

[QUOTE="Capitan_Kid"]One is death and the other isnt.TheGrat1

one costs more, and is irreversible

lostrib

And?

In response to irreversibility: I'm not a "death penalty, every time all the time" guy. But when the guilt is this obvious "he admitted it", and the crime is this heinous, why not?

you asked difference

you asked difference

lostrib

Practical difference. A life sentence is just a death sentence that takes longer. They'll never be able to re-assimilate and contribute to society and committed several murders, a death sentence is just and expediant.

Thank god, this trial took long enough he deserves much worse

dont care for the DP, but fine with it in this case

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

you asked difference

TheGrat1

Practical difference. A life sentence is just a death sentence that takes longer. They'll never be able to re-assimilate and contribute to society and committed several murders, a death sentence is just and expediant.

Those are practical differences.

The death penalty is an idiotic sentence. If you think there may be a chance he didn't do it then there's the possibility that you're ending the life of an innocent and giving a group of people (who can be made corrupt just as easily as anyone else) the power to do it at will. If you know for certain he's done it (and this is almost never the case) then why end his suffering? You can't be sure there's anything afterwards so its prudent to assume his punishment should happen here. Redemption isn't the right word but most people can start to make amends to society. While they perhaps shouldn't be given the chance to do this outside prison they can still be put to good use and possibly help others. While you can never undo actions you can do other actions that benefit others. Ace6301

I am normally not a proponent of the death penalty but in this case, I am 100% OK with it.

The death penalty is an idiotic sentence. If you think there may be a chance he didn't do it then there's the possibility that you're ending the life of an innocent and giving a group of people (who can be made corrupt just as easily as anyone else) the power to do it at will. If you know for certain he's done it (and this is almost never the case) then why end his suffering? You can't be sure there's anything afterwards so its prudent to assume his punishment should happen here. Redemption isn't the right word but most people can start to make amends to society. While they perhaps shouldn't be given the chance to do this outside prison they can still be put to good use and possibly help others. While you can never undo actions you can do other actions that benefit others. Ace6301

[QUOTE="Ace6301"]The death penalty is an idiotic sentence. If you think there may be a chance he didn't do it then there's the possibility that you're ending the life of an innocent and giving a group of people (who can be made corrupt just as easily as anyone else) the power to do it at will. If you know for certain he's done it (and this is almost never the case) then why end his suffering? You can't be sure there's anything afterwards so its prudent to assume his punishment should happen here. Redemption isn't the right word but most people can start to make amends to society. While they perhaps shouldn't be given the chance to do this outside prison they can still be put to good use and possibly help others. While you can never undo actions you can do other actions that benefit others. Toxic-Seahorse

I am normally not a proponent of the death penalty but in this case, I am 100% OK with it.

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"]The death penalty is an idiotic sentence. If you think there may be a chance he didn't do it then there's the possibility that you're ending the life of an innocent and giving a group of people (who can be made corrupt just as easily as anyone else) the power to do it at will. If you know for certain he's done it (and this is almost never the case) then why end his suffering? You can't be sure there's anything afterwards so its prudent to assume his punishment should happen here. Redemption isn't the right word but most people can start to make amends to society. While they perhaps shouldn't be given the chance to do this outside prison they can still be put to good use and possibly help others. While you can never undo actions you can do other actions that benefit others. Ace6301

I am normally not a proponent of the death penalty but in this case, I am 100% OK with it.

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"] Do you even know the case that is being talked about? There is no question he did it. People saw him do it, they even shot him as he was doing it. Also, this guy isn't going to be helping anyone. Even if he didn't get the death penalty, he would be locked up by himself and not in the general population. He's a crazy lunatic and prison isn't gonig to change that. 

I am normally not a proponent of the death penalty but in this case, I am 100% OK with it.

Kurushio

I believe death penalty trials are much more costly than regular muder trials  (life without parole).  And then Death row itself is more costly, and not even everyone on deathrow will end up being executed.  

[QUOTE="Kurushio"][QUOTE="Ace6301"] You realize killing him achieves absolutely nothing, right? Nothing positive at least. Wastes more tax dollars than keeping him alive but I'd hardly call that an accomplishment. I also like that I make an argument you don't even respond to any of the points in and then accuse me of not knowing the case. Classy.lostrib

I believe death penalty trials are much more costly than regular muder trials  (life without parole).  And then Death row itself is more costly, and not even everyone on deathrow will end up being executed.  

Yeah it's the repeated trials with all the appeals that is what is costly.

Thing is though, wasn't Texas at one point talking of putting in a fast lane for death penalty cases where there were numerous witnesses and such? That alone could mean that it wouldn't be terribly costly if they avoid all the extra appeal triels.

Nidal Hasan sentenced to death for Fort Hood shooting rampage in the first death sentence of an active duty soldier in 52 years.

Does he deserve the sentence? 

WhiteKnight77

Practical difference. A life sentence is just a death sentence that takes longer. They'll never be able to re-assimilate and contribute to society and committed several murders, a death sentence is just and expediant.

TheGrat1

[QUOTE="ferrari2001"]Way to go America, one of the only 1st world countries to still sport the death penalty. Time to get rid of it. Toxic-Seahorse

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"]The death penalty is an idiotic sentence. If you think there may be a chance he didn't do it then there's the possibility that you're ending the life of an innocent and giving a group of people (who can be made corrupt just as easily as anyone else) the power to do it at will. If you know for certain he's done it (and this is almost never the case) then why end his suffering? You can't be sure there's anything afterwards so its prudent to assume his punishment should happen here. Redemption isn't the right word but most people can start to make amends to society. While they perhaps shouldn't be given the chance to do this outside prison they can still be put to good use and possibly help others. While you can never undo actions you can do other actions that benefit others. Ace6301

I am normally not a proponent of the death penalty but in this case, I am 100% OK with it.

I'm so fvcking sick of people using the "it costs more" argument against the death penalty. The only reason it does is because of the absolutely laughable amount of paperwork required, and this country's love of wasting money giving admitted and proven mass murderers a billion appeals. It doesn't actually cost more money to kill a man than to keep him alive in prison for 30+ years. The people in power  make  it cost more, because they see it as an opportunity to hand out millions of dollars to a bunch of lawyers, over the course of several years. In a case like this one, there is no reason that the death penalty should cost the state any more than the price of one bullet, five blanks, and two minutes of time from half a dozen cops.

[QUOTE="ferrari2001"]Way to go America, one of the only 1st world countries to still sport the death penalty. Time to get rid of it. Toxic-Seahorse

Because he wants to be seen as a matyr, as a Muslim warrior.

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"]

[QUOTE="ferrari2001"]Way to go America, one of the only 1st world countries to still sport the death penalty. Time to get rid of it. whiskeystrike

Because he wants to be seen as a matyr, as a Muslim warrior.

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"]

[QUOTE="ferrari2001"]Way to go America, one of the only 1st world countries to still sport the death penalty. Time to get rid of it. whiskeystrike

Because he wants to be seen as a matyr, as a Muslim warrior.

Multiple counts of pre-meditated murder? Of course this is the proper sentence, I wouldn't have it any other way. [QUOTE="ferrari2001"]Way to go America, one of the only 1st world countries to still sport the death penalty. Time to get rid of it. TheGrat1

Nidal Hasan sentenced to death for Fort Hood shooting rampage in the first death sentence of an active duty soldier in 52 years.

Does he deserve the sentence? 

WhiteKnight77

[QUOTE="chrisrooR"] It's too quick, and it gives him exactly what he wants. MrGeezer

SO WHAT? How does the lack of expediency help anyone but him? What does it matter to you or me if he got what he wants? Personally, I care about me. And my life is gonna go on the same regardless of whether or not thisa guy gets what he wants. Are there actual practical benefits for doing away with the death penalty? Absolutely. And spite is not one of those benefits. The only benefit it provides is making people feel better, but you know what? F*** that. This isn't a "nanny state", and life or death decisions shouldn't be made over feelings and emotions. There are perfectly rational reasons for doing away with the death penalty. But spite is a bad bad reason. You're treading on really dangerous ground. Logic lasts a long time, but emotions are fickle and fleeting. The result (sparing him from execution) may be good, but the motivation behind it (making him suffer) is some seriously dark $hit that tends to lead down a dangerous path. That's precisely the same path that leads someone to committing murder in the first place. Make no mistake...most people committing atrocities or murdering people AREN'T doing it in an attempt to ease their suffering, they're doing it because it makes them feel good to hurt those people.

If your life is going to go on the same, and you don't really care what happens to him why not give him life in prison. It would have cost FAR less in the court system for the tax payer (you), and it wouldn't support some sort of primitive blood-for-blood vengeance.

Life and death shouldn't be based on emotions? You seem to be  pretty upset at the notion of this guy NOT being put to death. And him rotting in prison was in the context of there being an absolute NO chance this guy wasn't the shooter. In these cases, it's better to lock the guy away in a federal prison and throw away the key. My main reasons against the death penalty are more sound, like the whole impossibility of release if new evidence turns up down the road.

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"]Well, I guess that's all you can expect from Texas.thegerg

No, he was convicted by the US Army. While the US Army is part of the federal government, it operates with different laws and rules compared to the federal government. The USMJ covers military personel while the Constitution covers federal employees. You are right in the fact that Texas has nothing to do with it since the killings took place on a military installation. 

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

Well that's just great. They have a new martyr. 

Jebus213

That does not mean it will be carried out now does it? 

wut?

Just exactly that. Did you even read the article? If you had, you would understand why. 

Way to go America, one of the only 1st world countries to still sport the death penalty. Time to get rid of it. ferrari2001

I'd agree to this if hard labor was still an available sentence.

Don't let the bastard sit in cell watching TV and writing shit for the rest of his life, make him turn big rocks into little rocks for the right to shit down a pipe.