Current Events > Dylan Roof sentenced to death. (lt)

(+) Yeah! (+)

At the end of the day none of this discussion matters, the death penalty exists, the justice system did the right thing here, im glad this scum is leaving the Earth and im glad the death penalty exists.

Heres to hoping the rest of these murdering scum meet the same fate.

---

EffectAndCause posted...

the death penalty exists

It doesn't have to. Twenty-three states have abolished it and three more have it on moratorium.

The death penalty didn't magically come into existence. People established it, and people can remove it.

---

Dark_Spiret posted...

a .45 out of a glock 41 in the back of his head seems appropriate. no point in making tax payers pay to keep him alive.

THIS

---

Bishop9800 posted...

Dark_Spiret posted...

a .45 out of a glock 41 in the back of his head seems appropriate. no point in making tax payers pay to keep him alive.

THIS

I expected better from you
---

ScazarMeltex posted...

That being said, there is no possible dispute that people like Timothy McVeigh, James Holmes, and Dylan Roof are guilty of the crimes they committed. Those are the types of people that we should be executing. They cannot be released back into society, they are (or were in the case of McVeigh) dangerous violent people that cannot or will not be rehabilitated

Please tell me the exact specific circumstances that would establish someone as "worthy" of the death penalty.

Does it have to be no remorse?

Does it have to be killing? How many?

Does it have to be the accused being "still kind of an asshole" after x amount of years in prison?

How big does their cult have to be before we judge them worthy of the death penalty?

---

UnholyMudcrab posted...

I expected better from you

So Im surpose to feel sorry for this piece of shit and advocate for his life when he didn't give a shit about the ones he killed?

Fuck him....

---

You guys really need to shut up about "taxpayer money going to the prison". Literally none of you give a shit about that. Not one person. That's just you reaching desperately for a defense of the death penalty vs. having a criminal actually suffer
---

ScazarMeltex posted...

It doesn't. We declare a person dead after they cease a certain level of brain activity. That level of brain activity does not begin until week 28 of the gestational process. Which would make the earliest a fetus could be technically alive is at that point.

My directive wasn't for you, because you're not using abortion as a tentpole for a pro death penalty argument.

---

ClunkerSlim posted...

It actually didn't.

The right thing would have been for the judge to deny Roof's request to represent himself. Force a lawyer on him. Let the lawyer bring in Roof's mental impairments, and let the court determine sentencing with all the facts presented.

Being stupid as fuck and racist isn't a mental impairment.

---

Rest in piss Dylan Roof.

---

Tyranthraxus posted...

Being stupid as fuck and racist isn't a mental impairment.

This

---

ScazarMeltex posted...

I would tend to believe that it's people like Roof and McVeigh who have absolutely zero remorse that should be guidelines.

I'm sorry. A "tendency to believe" is not good enough.

And even if it were, how do you measure "remorse"?

---

shockthemonkey posted...

Would you be ok with an entirely different scenario? is not the hypothetical that you think it is.

At the trial phase it's the exact same scenario. If the guilty don't get due process then the wrongfully accused don't get it either.

---

I said it before and I'll say it again.

Good. Let this fucker fry.

---

ClunkerSlim posted...

When are you guys going to read the thread?

We're executing a possibly autistic kid who never should have been allowed to defend himself in a capital murder case.

Why are you so gung ho about defending and saving this POS life? Is he your hero or something?

---

ScazarMeltex posted...

I mean McVeigh stating "the only regret I have is that I didn't level the whole building" is a pretty clear indicator that he legitimately believes he did nothing wrong. He thought of himself as waging a war.

That's not really answering my question, unless your answer is "a measuring unit called a 'McVeigh' is enough".

What you're suggesting is looking at individual cases and through an anecdotal reading just making a judgment call.

Which is what we have right now, effectively.

---

ClunkerSlim posted...

When are you guys going to read the thread?

Sooner or later you're going to have to come to terms with the fact that no one wants to talk to you.

---

Bishop9800 posted...

Why are you so gung ho about defending and saving this POS life? Is he your hero or something?

That's... not what he's doing.

Saying that the courts mishandled it and that he shouldn't have defended himself is not saying that he should've been let off the hook

This is why we can't have intelligent conversation about any of this. You guys interpret every single thing as a defense and it's fucking stupid.
---

dolomedes posted...

you've gotta look at the bigger picture sometime

Which is what? Some racist murderer's life is worth more then the people he killed?

---

That being said I'm not sure if I actually buy that he was mentally ill. That's used a little bit too often as a scapegoat for white mass murderers
---

dolomedes posted...

no.

calm down and think a bit more.

Then what is the "big picture?

---

ClunkerSlim posted...

Because I believe even the worst person on the planet deserves a fair trial.

And he had one.

So whats the problem?

---

One_Day_Remains posted...

That being said I'm not sure if I actually buy that he was mentally ill. That's used a little bit too often as a scapegoat for white mass murderers

This x1000!!!

---

ClunkerSlim posted...

------>
When are you guys going to read the thread?

We're executing a possibly autistic kid who never should have been allowed to defend himself in a capital murder case.

When was he diagnosed as being on the spectrum?

FWIW I agree with you that there appears to be some legal improprieties with how he was represented at sentencing

Bishop9800 posted...

Why are you so gung ho about defending and saving this POS life? Is he your hero or something?

Considering Clunker defends Rittenhouse... quite possibly!

Too bad there's no possible way to claim "self defense"(Which isn't what Rittenhouse did either) for Roof, so I guess the next best thing is to try to claim he didn't know what he was doing when he walked into a Black church with the intended purpose to murder the occupants and to start a race war.

Last I checked, 99% of people with Autism never decided to shoot up a church.

---

Umbreon posted...

Considering Clunker defends Rittenhouse... quite possibly!

Among other things.....


---

ClunkerSlim posted...

------>
When are you guys going to read the thread?

We're executing a possibly autistic kid who never should have been allowed to defend himself in a capital murder case.

I am a diagnosed autistic person. Get the fuck out of here with thinking that excuses mass murder. I'm personally offended by your braindead bullshit.

---

ClunkerSlim posted...

He arguably didn't and I've listed the reasons for that about 10 times now.

When his defense team worked with him they could tell he was off. So they passed him around to several experts. When some of the experts came back with "autism" he freaked the fuck out. Of course, the defense team planned to bring it up at trial. But Roof flipped out, telling them that the white nationalists wouldn't rescue him if they knew he was autistic. So he fired all his lawyers and fought to keep the jury from hearing the autistic diagnosis. He then convinced the judge he was sound enough to represent himself (because being labeled autistic would "be a fate worse than death," according to him.)

And if you want to believe he's not autistic, that's fine. But the jury should have heard the evidence at sentencing (at least) and the prosecution could have rebutted it. At least that way the jury would have been making an informed decision.

Still trying to defend this racist POS.

I wonder why...

---

ClunkerSlim posted...

No one said that. We're talking about sentencing. We're not talking about guilty/not guilty. We're talking about death vs life imprisonment.

The death penalty is barbaric, but while we have it, there is no fucking reason autism should get you off the hook.

You are literally making an excuse as to why he is too incompetent to be executed. And if he is too incompetent for that, is life imprisonment really any more humane?

Again, shut the fuck up and stop insulting autistic people.

---

ClunkerSlim posted...

I'm not defending Roof at all. In fact, every point I've made has been critical of every decision he's made. I'm not defending Roof, I'm criticizing the judge. Do you not get that? And do you really not understand why people should be given a fair trial?

You're not defending him, yet here you are advocating for him.

And yes, he did get a fair trail. How hard is it for you to understand that? Then again seeing your past posts, you wouldn't understand.

---

Allegedly being on the spectrum is irrelevant, he's sane enough to know right from wrong. He's a mass murderer, and he's getting exactly the sentence a mass murderer deserves.

A thinly veiled insanity plea isn't going to work here.

---

Pretty sure I lost a friend on CE over this?

Like to a degree I can agree that a state doesn't have the best track record of agreeing upon who's put to death. A state probably shouldn't have the power to put people to death - not should a state have the ability to strip a person of their nationality outside of extreme circumstances, for that matter. The state is ultimately as smart as its enforcers, who IMO are really fucking stupid 9 times out of 10. The chances of a government making the right call - American or otherwise - is really fucking slim.

But in the case of sick bastards like Dylan Roof? Let the fuckers fry. They're the 1/10 that the government got right. Him, the Christchurch shooter and other terrorists like the Boston bomber should get the chair. It's moreso a matter of whether wider society agrees that their life is forfeit than a broader appeal to human rights.

And yet by saying that, it opens the doors for retributionists to water down the category of fucked up mass murderers who deserve the chair to include political enemies and the like. Because the second you cede that power to the state and the people who believe in capital punishment, that power will be abused.

And yet while I disagree with people who find the death penalty unfavorable in regards to this particular sack of shit and his ilk - I understand that there's a broader context that my acceptance of their deaths possibly progresses. And I find it hard because I don't want to advance that agenda, but frankly? These racist mass-murdering fuckfaces like Dylan Roof and BT have voided their lives by committing the bigoted crimes they have.

So fuck it. If you don't want to ally with me, if you don't see me as progressive as you are or to a level that you're comfortable with, so be it. Let motherfuckers like Dylan Roof and the Christchurch shooter fry.

---