Manson Family Killer Asks For "Compassion"

[Elianna]

I think what it boils down to for me is that we all have to suffer consequences for our actions. What is the consequence for taking a life? Some wrongs can be made right, but a life. A LIFE! You can never give it back.

What should the consequence be? Mercy? When you showed none? Releasing Atkins from prison doesn't sound like mercy, it sounds like trying to avoid the consequences.

Let her serve her sentence. She earned it, after all.

 

[sutherngent985]

I despair for humans, sometimes.

For those of you who are Christian, what ever happened to "Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord."?

Most of you have more compassion for a dog than you do your fellow humans. She's dying. Isn't that enough for you?

I have to agree. So many "Christians" only are Christian when it suits them. Yes, what she did was extremely heinous. But does that mean she doesn't deserve mercy at the end of her life?

 

[cloudy]

I have to agree. So many "Christians" only are Christian when it suits them. Yes, what she did was extremely heinous. But does that mean she doesn't deserve mercy at the end of her life?

Thank you. At least I know I'm not completely alone.

 

[john-the-author]

I have to agree. So many "Christians" only are Christian when it suits them. Yes, what she did was extremely heinous. But does that mean she doesn't deserve mercy at the end of her life?

I'm not a Christian, so I don't feel obligated to let her run around loose in a society that deserves better.

Keep her behind bars until she's dead. Mercy would seem to mean that she's still alive and she gets care instead of being allowed to decay without drugs. Mercy does not mean that we say "Ego te absolvo" and turn her loose.

 

[john-the-author]

I have to agree. So many "Christians" only are Christian when it suits them. Yes, what she did was extremely heinous. But does that mean she doesn't deserve mercy at the end of her life?

You're right, SG, I do have more compassion for a dog than I do for her. I have the same amount of compassion for her that I have for a rabid dog and I have the same solution in mind: quick, merciful, as painless as possible, and the problem goes away.

 

[cloudy]

You're right, SG, I do have more compassion for a dog than I do for her. I have the same amount of compassion for her that I have for a rabid dog and I have the same solution in mind: quick, merciful, as painless as possible, and the problem goes away.

and if she were your daughter, your sister? Would your "mercy" be different?

Don't bother to say it wouldn't, because we all know differently.

Absolutely disgusting.

 

[S-Des]

Keep her behind bars until she's dead. Mercy would seem to mean that she's still alive and she gets care instead of being allowed to decay without drugs. Mercy does not mean that we say "Ego te absolvo" and turn her loose.

That's the interesting part of these discussions, when people try to define relative terms like 'mercy' for everyone else. To me, mercy is allowing her to live, providing her with food, clothing, medical care, the ability to have a handful of items to make that life more bearable, allowing her to marry behind bars, and giving her the opportunity to contribute something to society. It's not a great life, but certainly is not horrible torture. Instead of saying, "To me, it would be merciful to let her end her life on the outside," people decide what mercy is, then tell everyone else they're heartless for not agreeing. It's interesting that often the victim's family doesn't get a say in these types of arguments about what they think would be merciful.

I don't care either way. If they decided to let her live out her last few months on the outside, I'd be fine with it (as long there were no objections from any relatives of the victims). If they said no, it certainly wouldn't be doing anything other than carrying out the punishment she was given when she committed the crime. As long as they continue to provide her with care, they are showing her mercy (in my opinion). Everyone who is put in prison for life is going to die. We don't let all of them out when it's close to their time, so why is this case so different?

 

[Guest]

I'm not a Christian, so I don't feel obligated to let her run around loose in a society that deserves better.

Keep her behind bars until she's dead. Mercy would seem to mean that she's still alive and she gets care instead of being allowed to decay without drugs. Mercy does not mean that we say "Ego te absolvo" and turn her loose.

She'll spend her last few months of life flat on her back, heavily medicated and even unaware while her body gradually loses all function.

God's mercy? For me, that would be something along the lines of not having brain cancer in the first place.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

She'll spend her last few months of life flat on her back, heavily medicated and even unaware while her body gradually loses all function.

God's mercy? For me, that would be something along the lines of not having brain cancer in the first place.

One could make a case for "mercy" being euthanasia once the pain begins. Other than that, I have no opinion.

 

[Guest]

One could make a case for "mercy" being euthanasia once the pain begins. Other than that, I have no opinion.

I don't know the details of her situation but I imagine she's already being medicated for pain.

 

[only_more_so]

I don't know the details of her situation but I imagine she's already being medicated for pain.

She apparently has had a leg amputated for some reason.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Clearly, there is only one legitimate point of view on this issue, based on the response to those who express a different one. "What do you think?"(and you better get it right).

 

[Stella_Omega]

There are primarily three reasons to send someone to prison.

1. To punish the person convicted of a crime. In this case, the punishment that was mandated was that she remain in prison for the rest of her life (commuted from execution, which meant the rest of her life, just on the clock).

2. To rehabilitate the criminal. Once upon a time, prisons were called "Correctional Facilities" and the goal was to change the criminal so that they would behave onc released. This term has fallen out of favor since recividism rates are so high. Anyway, in this case a person has to wonder if she has reformed? Taken another way, has she been rendered harmless? The next of kin seems to think that's not the case, and for someone who committed such atrocious acts, I would err on the side of caution.

3. To serve as a deterrant to others. Some people say prison isn't a deterrant. But I say an unenforced law is a bad law, it undermines the legal system. If the police, judges, etc, can pick which laws to believe in, then why can't normal citizens? Part of enforcing a law is enforcing the sentance. So by releasing her early, they would undermine the deterrant value of her sentance.

There's a fourth reason, and I think it's really the most important one; To allow a society the security of being sure that justice will be served. There's a need for retribution that goes far beyond the participants; it affects society as a whole. We can see it in action when lynch mobs form, when riots erupted when the cops that beat Rodney King were let off, when Polanski's standing contract is an urban legend (whether or not it's true), when people here talk about how she'll last two minutes outside before she gets killed by someone.

None of these examples are good things to have happen, don't get me wrong. And we are moving just a little bit away from this tribal mode-- but we haven't moved very far away from it at all.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I'd also like to complain about the wording of the three choices in this poll.

I do think she was a vicious killer. I don't think she should go free; I also feel that compassionate care in her last days is just and imperative. It's not such an either/or.

 

[Guest]

I'd also like to complain about the wording of the three choices in this poll.

I do think she was a vicious killer. I don't think she should go free; I also feel that compassionate care in her last days is just and imperative. It's not such an either/or.

Yes, I couldn't choose one of the three, either.

And I agree with the bolded part of your post.

 

[Pure]

note to cloudy

Originally Posted by sutherngent985
I have to agree. So many "Christians" only are Christian when it suits them. Yes, what she did was extremely heinous. But does that mean she doesn't deserve mercy at the end of her life?

cloudy: Thank you. At least I know I'm not completely alone. [in suggesting mercy]

nice to hear from you, cloudy. the teachings of jesus about mercy have never been heeded by the vast majority of Christians. "turn the other cheek", "resist not evil", "love your enemies" etc are, you might say, rather neglected parts of jesus' dicta.

this is not an argument, of course. maybe it's correct to be harsh and retributive; to be vengeful. i'm just pointing out that people don't want to just come out and say 'yeah i'm harsh and vengeful'.

---

i note that a number of persons recommend compassion, e.g. stella
I also feel that compassionate care in her last days is just and imperative.

however it's clear to me, from the tone, that a number of folks here believe she should have been tortured and executed right after her being found guilty. again, maybe they're right. i'm just observing a degree of desire for shedding her blood that some should be open about.

 

[only_more_so]

There's a fourth reason, and I think it's really the most important one; To allow a society the security of being sure that justice will be served. There's a need for retribution that goes far beyond the participants; it affects society as a whole. We can see it in action when lynch mobs form, when riots erupted when the cops that beat Rodney King were let off, when Polanski's standing contract is an urban legend (whether or not it's true), when people here talk about how she'll last two minutes outside before she gets killed by someone.

None of these examples are good things to have happen, don't get me wrong. And we are moving just a little bit away from this tribal mode-- but we haven't moved very far away from it at all.

Good point Stella. I concentrated too much on the criminal side, that I skimped on the societal side.

HRE Fernand I said, "Fiat justitia et pereat mundus." Let justice be done though the world shall perish.

But when searching for the correct spelling, I came across this variant by Ludwig von Mises: "fiat iustitia, ne pereat mundus" Let justice be done lest the world perish.

 

[only_more_so]

I'd also like to complain about the wording of the three choices in this poll.

I do think she was a vicious killer. I don't think she should go free; I also feel that compassionate care in her last days is just and imperative. It's not such an either/or.

I had some trouble with the phrasing as well, but I took the options as:

She stays in jail.
Dunno
She gets out of jail.

 

[starrkers]

Why is it "merciful" to let her out of jail now? Her life is over to all intents and purposes, she will be unable to do anything with her time outside, if it is granted. So, she will be in a different room with a different view from the window.

It sounds more like an economic decision wrapped up in compassionate wrapping paper.

 

[Stella_Omega]

... some should be open about.

I bet if you think carefully, you can figure out why this phrasing doesn't work in any practical or dictatorial sense.

But when searching for the correct spelling, I came across this variant by Ludwig von Mises: "fiat iustitia, ne pereat mundus" Let justice be done lest the world perish.

man, that is beautiful

Why is it "merciful" to let her out of jail now? Her life is over to all intents and purposes, she will be unable to do anything with her time outside, if it is granted. So, she will be in a different room with a different view from the window.

It sounds more like an economic decision wrapped up in compassionate wrapping paper.

Damn straight.

 

[cloudy]

Why is it "merciful" to let her out of jail now? Her life is over to all intents and purposes, she will be unable to do anything with her time outside, if it is granted. So, she will be in a different room with a different view from the window.

It sounds more like an economic decision wrapped up in compassionate wrapping paper.

I would agree, except that I think in her last months, she should be able to have her family, whatever is left of them, around her. She is dying, and to deny that smacks of revenge, not justice.

 

[Pure]

note to starkers

Why is it "merciful" to let her out of jail now? Her life is over to all intents and purposes, she will be unable to do anything with her time outside, if it is granted. So, she will be in a different room with a different view from the window.

perhaps she could die more easily attended by friends and family.
... make sense?

---
note to box: spare me: "Sharon tate did not get to die attended by friends and family."

 

[Stella_Omega]

Why is it "merciful" to let her out of jail now? Her life is over to all intents and purposes, she will be unable to do anything with her time outside, if it is granted. So, she will be in a different room with a different view from the window.

perhaps she could die more easily attended by friends and family.
... make sense?

---
note to box: spare me: "Sharon tate did not get to die attended by friends and family."

Box wouldn't be the only one.

Can't her freinds and family attend her in the prison hospital?

 

[S-Des]

Can't her freinds and family attend her in the prison hospital?

In some cases, yes. If her care becomes more than they can perform at the prison, then she'll be shipped to a regular hospital (with guards). The laws vary and I don't know what they're like in California. It also depends on what kind of prison she's in. I'd think she'd have a better shot at getting moved to a minimum security prison, where it's set up for more interaction with family.

 

[john-the-author]

and if she were your daughter, your sister? Would your "mercy" be different?

Don't bother to say it wouldn't, because we all know differently.

Absolutely disgusting.

Don't be so sure about that. I think some things are beyond redemption.