How Would you Punish them?

[The Flying Dutchmans]

If you could catch any of the criminals portrayed on UM and decide their punishment, even the punishment of the ones who were caught; no matter what it is, how would you see them punished?

You need to name the person and what they did.

I can't remember her name, but the girl who was boating one day and another boat ran into her and tore her face apart, then stopped for a second to look at her, then took off real fast. I don't suppose they ever caught that scum, but I would like to catch them and rip their face off, and show them how it feels.

[1990 UM fan]

That is the Stephanie Booker case. To my knowledge, the people who did this have not been caught. There is rumor that Dennis Rodman's entourage may have been responsible. I don't think I would take it into my own hands, I'd let the law punish them.

[2xJ]

Out of all the UM episodes I've seen, after reading more about Edward Harold Bell, that ********* needs to die. Slowly and painfully.

[The Flying Dutchmans]

Originally Posted by 2xJ

Out of all the UM episodes I've seen, after reading more about Edward Harold Bell, that ********* needs to die. Slowly and painfully.

I agree. Bell is another one that needs to die.

[Matt C]

In the case of the little boys who burned alive in the fire [Scott Johnson and Peter Hill] in Bullhead City, I would sentence their murderers to death by fire in the same shed.

[MegtheEgg86]

.....And this is exactly why we have a legal system. I can't imagine a country in which the state stoops down to exact the same heinousness on the guilty that they inflict on their victims or where individuals are allowed to pursue vigilante justice.

Regardless of the uncivilized behavior of some of its members, I'm pretty glad I live in, well, a civilized society in which cruel and unusual punishment is prohibited. Even deep down inside and within the confines of a hypothetical situation, I still wouldn't choose to inflict on the perpetrators what they've done to their victims. There's already enough violence in the world.

[Matt C]

Originally Posted by MegtheEgg86

.....And this is exactly why we have a legal system. I can't imagine a country in which the state stoops down to exact the same heinousness on the guilty that they inflict on their victims or where individuals are allowed to pursue vigilante justice.

Regardless of the uncivilized behavior of some of its members, I'm pretty glad I live in, well, a civilized society in which cruel and unusual punishment is prohibited. Even deep down inside and within the confines of a hypothetical situation, I still wouldn't choose to inflict on the perpetrators what they've done to their victims. There's already enough violence in the world.

The philosophy against the death penalty isn't that killing a killer is wrong [albeit perhaps hypocritical in some sense] but rather that the power gets abused. No one should be sad that Ted Bundy was put to death, the problem is that there is a potential for innocent people to be executed, hence the reason why the death penalty is bad.

We simply can't give the power to the state to burn suspected/convicted murderers alive because the power would invariably be abused, so it is a good thing the state does not have that power. With that said, in a perfect world where the power would never be abused, we could [and in my view, should] enact such punishment. It's just that the power would be abused, hence the need for more civility in law.

[MegtheEgg86]

Originally Posted by Matt C

The philosophy against the death penalty isn't that killing a killer is wrong [albeit perhaps hypocritical in some sense] but rather that the power gets abused. No one should be sad that Ted Bundy was put to death, the problem is that there is a potential for innocent people to be executed, hence the reason why the death penalty is bad.

I don't recall making a death penalty argument.

We simply can't give the power to the state to burn suspected/convicted murderers alive because the power would invariably be abused, so it is a good thing the state does not have that power. With that said, in a perfect world where the power would never be abused, we could [and in my view, should] enact such punishment. It's just that the power would be abused, hence the need for more civility in law.

I do not share that sentiment in the least. Moreover, I imagine there is no need for criminal penance of any sort in a perfect world to begin with.

That is all.

[Matt C]

Originally Posted by MegtheEgg86

I don't recall making a death penalty argument.

You did not, but it would appear that those of us who would want scum like Robert Anthony Jones [Kari Lynn Nixon's killer] to be brutally raped, tortured, and murdered as punishment are not averse to the death penalty. Our desired form of punishment only differs in degree to methods such as the electric chair.

Originally Posted by MegtheEgg86

I do not share that sentiment in the least. Moreover, I imagine there is no need for criminal penance of any sort in a perfect world to begin with.

That is all.

In every system where the state has had the power to brutalize and murder its people, it has happened, so I realize that we cannot have a system that allows it. That said, I do think things are too lax, at least here in Canada. For example, Robert Linklater's 59th conviction was for murder. Perhaps a "three strikes, you're out" policy is excessive but how about a "30 strikes, you're out"? Seriously, you can practically get away with murder here. Drug "crime" and prostitution is one thing - adults consenting to activity with one another is not "crime" - but violence against people and their property? As said, it is far too lax here and I only dream of the day when the justice system becomes tougher.

[Matt C]

Originally Posted by MegtheEgg86

Moreover, I imagine there is no need for criminal penance of any sort in a perfect world to begin with.

Rather than perfect world, perhaps it would have been more appropriate for me to say "in a world where legal authority is not abused".

[MegtheEgg86]

Originally Posted by Matt C

That said, I do think things are too lax, at least here in Canada. For example, Robert Linklater's 59th conviction was for murder. Perhaps a "three strikes, you're out" policy is excessive but how about a "30 strikes, you're out"? Seriously, you can practically get away with murder here. Drug "crime" and prostitution is one thing - adults consenting to activity with one another is not "crime" - but violence against people and their property? As said, it is far too lax here and I only dream of the day when the justice system becomes tougher.

I don't know much about the Canadian legal system. When it comes to criminal law, are things like "mandatory parole" and that kind of thing putting people on the street that shouldn't be?

[Matt C]

Originally Posted by MegtheEgg86

I don't know much about the Canadian legal system. When it comes to criminal law, are things like "mandatory parole" and that kind of thing putting people on the street that shouldn't be?

All the time. I know two people with over 30 violent charges who are still getting only weeks to months in jail for further assaults. It's appalling. The murderer below had nearly 30 violent convictions before receiving a lowly sentence of six years for manslaughter:

http://www.tbnewswatch.com/news/8181...rial-jury-told
http://www.tbnewswatch.com/news/65953/Six-years

Read the comments on the second article. And thanks to Gladue legislation, Aboriginal murderers get lighter sentences as stipulated by Canada's Supreme Court.

In short, if we got into an argument over this thread and I beat you with my chair and you died, I would be out free within a year. In my case, having no criminal record would make a difference but it's ridiculously lax here.

So while I dream of stricter punishment in Canada for things like rape and murder, I tend to think with my emotions when it comes to cases like some mentioned above. However, the opposite side of the spectrum is even less effective than an overly lax system and it is a good thing we live in a civilized society as you said.

[Necco]

Elizabeth Fuentes Ortiz, the protein shake poisoner, should be forced to watch the incredibly bad acting "That man has Jonathan" footage on a loop for all eternity.

Anna Anderson and Brushy Bill should have had to have married each other and written a book/teleplay about their adventures as being the great pretenders.

Dan "DB" Cooper should have to make PSAs about airplane evacuation procedures with that JetBlue steward who grabbed a beer and slide down the slide.

[Matt C]

Originally Posted by Necco

Elizabeth Fuentes Ortiz, the protein shake poisoner, should be forced to watch the incredibly bad acting "That man has Jonathan" footage on a loop for all eternity.

Yes, and then consume a "high protein amino acid milkshake" spiked with liquid insecticide.

Have you ever watched a show or movie where a topic you are very familiar with is covered and you catch a mistake which is obvious to you but was not to the writers/producers? Although I suppose the shake Robert Stack described is possible, you just rarely hear it phrased like that. Not bad wording for a non-bodybuilding fan though.

[MegtheEgg86]

Originally Posted by Matt C

All the time. I know two people with over 30 violent charges who are still getting only weeks to months in jail for further assaults. It's appalling. The murderer below had nearly 30 violent convictions before receiving a lowly sentence of six years for manslaughter:

http://www.tbnewswatch.com/news/8181...rial-jury-told
http://www.tbnewswatch.com/news/65953/Six-years

Read the comments on the second article. And thanks to Gladue legislation, Aboriginal murderers get lighter sentences as stipulated by Canada's Supreme Court.

In short, if we got into an argument over this thread and I beat you with my chair and you died, I would be out free within a year. In my case, having no criminal record would make a difference but it's ridiculously lax here.

So while I dream of stricter punishment in Canada for things like rape and murder, I tend to think with my emotions when it comes to cases like some mentioned above. However, the opposite side of the spectrum is even less effective than an overly lax system and it is a good thing we live in a civilized society as you said.

That is enlightening. I think another hallmark of a civilized society is protection of the vulnerable. It's disappointing to hear that sentences for murder and rape are so light there. Your feelings are definitely understandable.

OT, I served with Canadian soldiers in Enduring Freedom and they are some of my favorite people in the world. Genuinely kind, down-to-earth folks.