Lockerbie bomber allowed to die at home

[Dead Winter]

So Derek, what do you think about all this?

I've got to side with the US on this one.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090820/ap_on_re_eu/eu_britain_lockerbie

 

[Will Bozarth]

a LIFE sentence is until his LIFE is over. the plane that took him home should have had a bomb on it

 

[Lord Foul]

You can't meaningfully punish someone for the murder of 270 people. You can put someone away to rehabilitate them or to protect society from them. Clearly if someone is serving a life sentence, there is no sense in seeking rehabilitation; therefore as long as he remains a threat to society, he should remain imprisoned. If the Scottish prison system can save money by releasing a dying man who cannot reasonably take up his old bombing trade in the few days or weeks remaining to him, by all means.

 

[El Stormo]

You can't meaningfully punish someone for the murder of 270 people. You can put someone away to rehabilitate them or to protect society from them. Clearly if someone is serving a life sentence, there is no sense in seeking rehabilitation; therefore as long as he remains a threat to society, he should remain imprisoned. If the Scottish prison system can save money by releasing a dying man who cannot reasonably take up his old bombing trade in the few days or weeks remaining to him, by all means.

+1

 

[lad]

I'm sort o on the fence over this. Not personally affected but..

You can't meaningfully punish someone for the murder of 270 people.

With that in mind, I heard a bloke on the radio point out that Megrahi was the only person convicted, and as such, without him nobody will have faced prosecution. Essentially his argument seemed to be that the public should be allowed to hold somebody responsible, the certainty of his involvement notwithstanding.

Also if our prison system's as over-crowded (and "soft") as it sounds then aye, less tax towards this seems a sound choice.

Hard not to empathise with those directly affected though. If he was complicit, does he deserve his final 3 months of relative freedom? I wouldn't say so, personally. I'm curious to hear to the Libyan response.

Ronnie Biggs though, he can walk. Nae danger.

 

[DreamNeonBlack]

What would be awesome is if his cancer goes into remission (sp?) and he lives for another couple of years or...
Since he hasn't long to live decides to go out with a BANG and suicide bombs something/people/place.
That is what I would do and I'd leave a note saying "SUCKERS".

 

[Lord Foul]

With that in mind, I heard a bloke on the radio point out that Megrahi was the only person convicted, and as such, without him nobody will have faced prosecution. Essentially his argument seemed to be that the public should be allowed to hold somebody responsible, the certainty of his involvement notwithstanding.

This smacks of lynch mob mentality, but it usefully illustrates one of the flawed reasonings behind the justice system; Punishment benefits nobody, and harms some. Catering to the desire to see someone who has wronged you hurt in equal measure is just feeding the least desirable aspects of human nature. In short: don't feed the urge to hurt those who have wronged you. That is how we get legions of dumb fall guys willing to blow up planes or suicide bomb to begin with.

 

[Captain Beard]

At least some of us admit we do that. Victim's families play the holier than thou role.

 

[Dead Winter]

I am going to take the "lower ground" and say that he doesn't deserve to be set free...the guy blew up a fucking plane. Let him rot in jail. Actually, the fact that he got a life sentence instead of being put to death is enough of a travesty. Three months of prison time is not going to break the Scottish prison system.

Eye for an eye. It doesn't leave the whole world blind because you've still got one eye left. Maybe that makes me less of a human being, but so be it. Human beings are shit anyway.

You may be able to rehabilitate prisoners convicted of some crimes, and I'm all for that. Prison shouldn't be there just to put bad people away; it should serve as some sort of rehabilitation as well. We know that's a bunch of bullshit because humans are not rational beings...taking the high road doesn't do anything but hurt us in the end. Until we become perfect beings and our emotions can give way to rational pre-programmed thought, it's not going to work. I look forward to the day when we can perfect humanity by wiping away all our flaws and what makes us human, but this isn't the society we live in. Let him die in a prison cell.

He blew up a fucking airliner. He didn't deal smack on the street corner...he blew up a FUCKING AIRLINER. He didn't get caught breaking into someone's house...he blew up a FUCKING AIRLINER.

HE BLEW UP A FUCKING AIRLINER.

 

[WhiteBeastofWotan]

I happen to agree, Chris.

 

[Dead Winter]

As I knew you would, Maxie. When they start the cybernetic trials, put in a good word for me.

I think it completely reasonable to do away with bad human behavior and incorporate a more perfect human.

I understand that compassion is a good trait and I'm all for it when someone is deserving of it. But that's the quagmire in our cybernetic utopia, the wrench thrown into our proverbial "machine". Compassion is a human trait and strictly human, and as such cannot be measured or decided when or to whom we should show it. I'm afraid that as humans we will never be 100% perfect because unless we become 100% machine, perfection can never be reached.

It makes me sad, this.

 

[DreamNeonBlack]

I'm just worried about the precedent set here. I was half-joking before with my comments but really what is going to happen is someone is going to use the "I have only a month to live" get-out-of-jail card, be released and do something very terrible with the time they have left.

 

[Shpongled]

I'm not really clear yet on what this guy did that was so wrong.

 

[Lord Foul]

I guess I don't really think about what people "deserve" as that is a sort of fake idea to me. I think you are always going to be disappointed if you need to see people get what they deserve, because reality stubbornly refuses to conform to an individual's sense of right and wrong. Stuff happens, and it is good or bad depending on your point of view.

 

[Shpongled]

As I knew you would, Maxie. When they start the cybernetic trials, put in a good word for me.

I think it completely reasonable to do away with bad human behavior and incorporate a more perfect human.

I understand that compassion is a good trait and I'm all for it when someone is deserving of it. But that's the quagmire in our cybernetic utopia, the wrench thrown into our proverbial "machine". Compassion is a human trait and strictly human, and as such cannot be measured or decided when or to whom we should show it. I'm afraid that as humans we will never be 100% perfect because unless we become 100% machine, perfection can never be reached.

It makes me sad, this.

But as imperfect humans we created machines. So how can any machine be perfect and how would the idea of "perfection" ever come to be? Who could determine such a thing if no human is perfect?

I think it's safer to say that humans will never be perfect until they no longer exist.

 

[Dead Winter]

They've already tried it in the states, didn't they? That guy who claimed he was too fat to be executed ended up being executed anyway.

Lord Foul has a perfectly reasonable explanation and actually is completely right and makes sense. I am against prison being used as a simple island for "bad" people...it should serve as some form of rehabilitation definitely. However, a line has to be drawn. A guy breaking into someone's home to steal for his drug habit is a far cry from bombing an airliner. But there IS a punishment for people who commit crimes of this magnitude. To be against any sort of punishment is akin to giving people like Pol Pot, Hitler, Stalin, and Dick Cheney a get-out-of-jail-free card.

Yep, Dick Cheney.

 

[Dead Winter]

But as imperfect humans we created machines. So how can any machine be perfect and how would the idea of "perfection" ever come to be? Who could determine such a thing if no human is perfect?

I think it's safer to say that humans will never be perfect until they no longer exist.

That's kinda what I was getting at. I was using a machine as kind of a metaphor, and not necessarily one built by humans.

 

[WhiteBeastofWotan]

Agreed, perfection is unobtainable. But cybernetics would certainly go a long way.

 

[WhiteBeastofWotan]

not necessarily one built by humans.

Ooo alien machines, i like your line of thought.

 

[Shpongled]

That's kinda what I was getting at. I was using a machine as kind of a metaphor, and not necessarily one built by humans.

I think a caveman would be n equally as effective metaphor. They lived just like the wild animals of today. Fight or flight, only the strong survive. All instinct, no emotion.

Which, if you think about it, is really fucking scary. I wouldn't have made it long in a primal age. It'd be like the absolute worst of modern humans succeeding. Big, strong, mean individuals with no remorse for killing ruling the lands.