Breaking: Boston Marathon Bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev sentenced to death - Polidicks

Bill Richards testimony is enough for me to think the bomber deserves death. Bill Richards knew his 8 year old son was going to die, but he also had to save his 7 year old quickly or she would lose her leg. He had to leave his son to die and rushed his daughter to be saved. That was the last time he saw his son. [url]http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/05/us/boston-marathon-bombing-trial/[/url] testimony here.

[QUOTE=agentfazexx;47731592]Brainwashed people like this are a loss at rehabilitating. I haven't seen any cases of that being successfully done.[/QUOTE] please list the cases you HAVE seen

[QUOTE=SPESSMEHREN;47731870]wow so now i can say i personally knew a terrorist AND someone who got sentenced to death. [/QUOTE] I have to ask...

[QUOTE=Memobot;47731911]I agree. Eye for an eye is good in principle, but in situations like this it's worrying to see so many people want this verdict out of what appears to be purely bloodlust. Nothing about justice, just a knee-jerk reaction.[/QUOTE] The phrase "an eye for an eye" does not actually mean to inflict the same punishment as was the crime. It actually only means that the punishment should fit the crime, a legal premise most of us would surely agree with.

[QUOTE=PolarEventide;47731901]The problem I have with this verdict is where it took place. Massachusetts outlawed the death penalty. The crime was committed in Massachusetts. The crime was tried in Massachusetts. The crime was ultimately against the people of Boston. Regardless of the federal nature of the case, I feel that the verdict ought to respect what has been the law in Massachusetts for the past 31 years — a law based on what the people of Massachusetts feel is moral.[/QUOTE] Terrorism is a federal offense, thus you can get federal punishments, which the death penalty is one.

[QUOTE=CreeplyTuna;47731950]Thank you for this, it drives me up a wall when people misunderstand the death penalty. My favorite example: New Jersey has spend 250 million dollars in 30 years without actually killing anyone. You know why? Because it takes years of appeals in court before you actually get to the execution. In this case, we're sure we have the right guy, but I don't think there should be an exception. That just make Tsarnaev "special." Why don't we just lock him up and forget about him? He should be treated like a nobody. And it's not like their going to take him into the back of the court house and execute him. The families of the people he hurt aren't going to get closure for a long time, and are going to have to deal with the appeal process when they should be trying to move on with their lives and pull themselves back together. Sure, right this moment we can sit back and feel like we got the bad guy, and then in a couple years once we forget about all this, we find he was finally executed. Yay for us. I feel like my tax dollars went to a worthy cause. The death penalty will just satisfy the bloodlust of the general population, but we're not helping the families and the people affected move on with their lives.[/QUOTE] Fair enough, you make some good points. Its too easy to get all sanguinary in the heat of moments like this and I think this perspective is nice.

[QUOTE=SPESSMEHREN;47731870]wow so now i can say i personally knew a terrorist AND someone who got sentenced to death. [/QUOTE] Imagine how many lists you're on

The outcome was never really in doubt, was it? His death was always a certainty, whether it be by the Federal Government or by a prison shank. [QUOTE=UncleJimmema;47731866]Life in prison would have been better, it would still have basically been a death sentence and he wouldn't become a martyr.[/QUOTE] So you'd rather he die by prison shank? Because that's what would end up happening. This guy was doomed from the getgo, this verdict really only changes who puts him in his grave. [QUOTE=PolarEventide;47731901]The problem I have with this verdict is where it took place. Massachusetts outlawed the death penalty. The crime was committed in Massachusetts. The crime was tried in Massachusetts. The crime was ultimately against the people of Boston. Regardless of the federal nature of the case, I feel that the verdict ought to respect what has been the law in Massachusetts for the past 31 years — a law based on what the people of Massachusetts feel is moral.[/QUOTE] And yet I somehow doubt there's a single sane person in that state who's gonna cry 'bah don't kill him'. He blew up a marathon, after all. Something relatively harmless and family friendly. There's a limit to how far someone will stick to something like 'No death penalty' and this guy has shot right past that limit. [editline]15th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=gudman;47731936]Doesn't bring back any lives too, doesn't even make families of victims and survivors feel better.[/QUOTE] Neither does life in prison, which also carries the...admittedly miniscule...risk of escape. More realistically, life in prison carries with it the risk that he could somehow organize a second attack, something that we have plenty of precedent for with how many major gang leaders are running international gangs from within supermax cells with almost the same efficiency that they ran them from the free world. If shit-tier streetgangs can figure out a code language capable of operating through the prison mail filter so can Mr Tsarnaev. I honestly don't have a strong opinion either way, but I feel its worth pointing that out.

[QUOTE=jordguitar;47731472]He is being sentenced to death by lethal injection. What if the supreme court this summer says that lethal injection is illegal? What are we going to do to kill him then?[/QUOTE] Firing squad.

Well I guess that's that then.

[QUOTE=agentfazexx;47731592]Brainwashed people like this are a loss at rehabilitating. I haven't seen any cases of that being successfully done.[/QUOTE] And you're perfectly knowledgeable enough to make that claim?

Good riddance you nutcase.

[QUOTE=woolio1;47731834]It evens out at about 25 years, which is the standard "life sentence" with parole. Assuming he wouldn't have parole, he's got about 40-50 years in prison. The court costs for the death penalty would be cheaper in this case.[/QUOTE] If its a fed case Life without parole = life without parole. Even life with the possibility of parole still = life with a possibility of parole. Its when you get out of the feds courts that "life" changes

Now to just wait 20 years through countless appeals and millions of dollars for them to actually kill him.

[QUOTE=OvB;47731996]I have to ask...[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure he said a while ago that he was enrolled at the same campus Tsarnaev had gone to

People often confuses justice with revenge, it's a fine line between them. But either way, most people get what they want. The way I see it, is that the real difference between both is that one is quicker, expensive, and would leave people satisfied faster, but can do more harm than good. The other is unreliable, slow paced, and can leave people dissapointed at first and with distrust about the system, but it can be the perfect punishment when done right. I would rather see the guy suffer in jail than get him killed right away in this case. Death is what most religious extremist want anyway.

[QUOTE=TestECull;47732078]The outcome was never really in doubt, was it? His death was always a certainty, whether it be by the Federal Government or by a prison shank. So you'd rather he die by prison shank? Because that's what would end up happening. This guy was doomed from the getgo, this verdict really only changes who puts him in his grave. And yet I somehow doubt there's a single sane person in that state who's gonna cry 'bah don't kill him'. He blew up a marathon, after all. Something relatively harmless and family friendly. There's a limit to how far someone will stick to something like 'No death penalty' and this guy has shot right past that limit. [editline]15th May 2015[/editline] Neither does life in prison, which also carries the...admittedly miniscule...risk of escape. More realistically, life in prison carries with it the risk that he could somehow organize a second attack, something that we have plenty of precedent for with how many major gang leaders are running international gangs from within supermax cells with almost the same efficiency that they ran them from the free world. If shit-tier streetgangs can figure out a code language capable of operating through the prison mail filter so can Mr Tsarnaev. I honestly don't have a strong opinion either way, but I feel its worth pointing that out.[/QUOTE] No, when capital punishment is outlawed there is not a "limit" to it. That's the purpose of outlawing it. [editline]15th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=DuCT;47731998]Terrorism is a federal offense, thus you can get federal punishments, which the death penalty is one.[/QUOTE] Thank you for stating something I already said; "the federal nature of the case" My point was that despite things like the Supremacy Clause and federalism that make something like this possible, it still makes me uncomfortable that a verdict was delivered that disrespected the mores of the place in which the crime was committed.

[QUOTE=TestECull;47732078] Neither does life in prison, which also carries the...admittedly miniscule...risk of escape. More realistically, life in prison carries with it the risk that he could somehow organize a second attack, something that we have plenty of precedent for with how many major gang leaders are running international gangs from within supermax cells with almost the same efficiency that they ran them from the free world. If shit-tier streetgangs can figure out a code language capable of operating through the prison mail filter so can Mr Tsarnaev. I honestly don't have a strong opinion either way, but I feel its worth pointing that out.[/QUOTE] Tsarnaev wasn't exactly a godfather, and even if he was - well, that sounds like a call for improvement of the penitentiary system. What kind of improvement - don't ask me, I'm not a specialist. I'm pretty sure there're some concepts out there. From where I'm standing, it's simple: not executing a person is the default. There has to be a clear advantage in executing a person for me to even consider it an option, and minuscule hypothetical possibility that some brainwashed fuck could become a local criminal mastermind doesn't really convince me. Granted, my opinion means fuck all, but that's still my perspective.

I hope nothing like what he did ever happens again

Will he still be in supermax or will he be in the general prison population while he's waiting on Death Row?

[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;47732182]I dunno about you guys, but getting life in prison sounds 10x worse than the death penalty.[/QUOTE] Well, judging by the inmates held in our "Black Dolphin" and "White Swan" maximum security prisons, it is. That's where convicts sentenced to death and life imprisonment are held. Ones that were waiting for an execution were less than happy to find out that, due to moratorium, they're not going to be escaping their misery. [editline]15th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Fort83;47732306]Unless you are family of one of the victims or a survivor then you're not really in any position to say that it wouldn't make them feel better.[/QUOTE] Let's say I am in a position to say that it most likely won't make anyone feel better.

[QUOTE=matt000024;47731530]No one deserves the death penalty though.[/QUOTE] Don't they? I have a hard time reckoning with the idea that life in high-sec prison is somehow more merciful or humane than putting someone to the sword figuratively speaking. Now see, I can understand objecting to it from a point of procedure: what if the person is truly innocent and the courts have made a mistake? - it happens. But the idea that life imprisonment in a cage is somehow better than killing is not one i can get behind, it seem one born out of willful ignorance: out of sight, out of mind, hes locked up and i dont have to feel any moral turpitude about what we're doing. Especially considering US high-sec prisons are some the most barbaric places on Earth. In context, this isn't a man who is going to do his time and repay his debt to society and walk out in 50 years. Its either the death penalty, or life in prison. If the problem is one of morality, the latter is far more cruel.

[QUOTE=gudman;47731936]Doesn't even make families of victims and survivors feel better. Doesn't do anything really. It's just killing somebody.[/QUOTE] I never really understand when people just spout this phrase. I'm not arguing for or against it here, but do you know for a fact that none of the survivors or family members want the death penalty for him or are you just spouting a buzz phrase to suit what you believe? And "doesn't do anything" isn't true since killing the guy is technically "doing something," same as letting him rot in prison is "doing something." Whether or not its a good thing is up for debate.

Execution is showing futile mercy, let the man rot in a fucking dungeon.

The death penalty here in Washington State is in an interesting state It still exists, we haven't abolished it or outlawed it, but our last few governors have placed/continued a moratorium on the death penalty. And just recently one of my professors did a study on the financial costs of death penalty cases versus the non-death penalty cases [url]http://www.law.seattleu.edu/newsroom/2015-news/seattle-university-study-finds-washington-death-penalty-cases-cost-at-least-1-million-more-than-when-death-not-sought[/url]

[QUOTE=NeverGoWest;47732468]Execution is showing futile mercy, let the man rot in a fucking dungeon.[/QUOTE] There's a lot of cases were chemical execution is not merciful at all. If I remember correctly it has to do with the prisons having to improvise due to not having access to the correct chemical.

[QUOTE=jordguitar;47731472]He is being sentenced to death by lethal injection. What if the supreme court this summer says that lethal injection is illegal? What are we going to do to kill him then?[/QUOTE] we put a GPS tracker on his ankle and release him in detroit

I dont think hes going to be a martyr of any kind. Legitimate terrorists laughed at these two, the USA asked around and I remember reading official terrorists groups gave their statements. They essentially were laughing at them saying they would never do something so small and meaningless. Which in truth, it really was. Only thing is some more security during the marathon, but the marathon was even stronger the year after the bombing. It essentially brought more people together. They sadly got two people killed and injured others, but in the grand scheme of things, thats nothing. The ones injured have also gotten insane support. These arent anyone worth of being a martyr to anyone, thats how low of garbage they are. Death penalty is kind of iffy for me. But in this specific case where they know 100% this guy is 100% at fault im not 100% against it. Would much rather someone like him have to just live and die in jail for the rest of his life.

-snip-

[QUOTE=OvB;47731996]I have to ask...[/QUOTE] I go to UMass Dartmouth and my roommates in 2012 played in the same soccer team he did. I've met him a few times when they all hung out in my dorm. Didn't really talk to him much except introducing myself since they were all stoners and would all smoke. [editline]15th May 2015[/editline] fun fact: commencement ceremonies were underway here the moment the sentence was handed down. He was sentenced to death on the day he should have graduated.