BS: Death Penalty?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: DougR
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:21 PM

A young man was arrested this week in our metropolitan area for drowning the two year old boy of his girlfriend. He has admitted to taking the child from it's crib, walking hand in hand to the swimming pool at the apartment complex where the little boy lived, lowering him into the pool, and holding him under the water until he was no longer breathing.

No question in my mind at all that this young man should be put to death. Later news stories indicate the mother of the child was an accomplice to the deed. If so, she should join him on the table and also be injected with the fluid that will take the life from her.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 05:03 PM

About 30 years ago, I worked in the corrections system in my home state. At the time, I believed in Capital Punishment.

Many of the inmates were really nasty people, one of whom accidently got out and killed his therapist "because she was unfaithful to me." He then fled the state and lived quietly for most of the last 30 years before turning himself in for that crime. It was decided that this murder was an artifact of his insanity and that his ability to successfully live in society should weigh in his favor. He is now serving a [relatively] brief sentence to complete his previous sentence and will be released soon. Is he worthy of the death penalty? Maybe, maybe not. At the time of the crime, I would have sentenced him for killing a colleague, even though he had gotten out on a pass that she signed for him.

A year or two ago, I listened as two Muslim terrorists were sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. They were involved in something which ended in significant loss of life. As they believed they were participating in Jihad, they wanted to be sentenced to death, so they could be martyred and go to Paradise. They were sentenced to life in prison without parole.

If we cannot reasonably sentence people to death for mass murder, despite their potential, hypothetical innocence, how can we reasonably sentence anyone to death? What is the effect on the souls of the executioners?

As Gandhi replied when asked about his thoughts on Western Civilization: "I think it would be a very good thing." Perhaps we should take a leaf from his book and allow time to sort things out without hurrying them along.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 04:14 PM

"To maintain our civilized society vicious criminals should be removed from society for life"

At a cost of no more than 35 cents each...

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,guest from NW
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 04:00 PM

in a nutshell... 1. the state should not have the right to execute its citizens. if it does, that right WILL be abused, innocent people will be killed and racism and politics will figure into the policies of execution. 2. if you say you are a Christian yet believe in the death penalty you are a hypocrite. Ultimate judgement for wrongdoing is left for God according to Christian principles. To maintain our civilized society vicious criminals should be removed from society for life. Don't want to pay for it? it's the price of civilization and moral clarity.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: alanabit
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 03:35 PM

A couple of very interesting and well balanced posts from Rapaire and Wolfgang (as usual). I am not really in agreement though with the conclusions you have drawn.
First of all Wolfgang, I think the, "One's too many" argument is very convincing indeed. The state's judgement has to be based on an absolute conviction (as far as possible) that the sentenced man deserves the punishment. We are talking about the state's responsibility - and not that of a revenge killer in a seventies vigilante movie.
Oddly enough, the argument that life imprisonment is worse than execution - which I personally agree with - does not necessarily make it a better deterrent. I would expect most convicted murderers to react emotionally rather than rationally.
The debate on this thread so far seems to have focused very much on the worst case scenario - in reality a very small minority of all murderers.
That brings me to Rapaire's point, which is that if the guilt in a horrendous crime is beyond all doubt, does there have to be a case for execution?
I'll come out with the NOs on that one. A murderer who leaves so much evidence around that his conviction cannot be in any doubt is in fact a bloody fool. However, a truly devious, calculating murderer sets out to leave very little evidence indeed. Who is more deserving of punishment? Who is more likely to receive it? I am against the death penalty because I believe it undermines the justice system. I have very little sympathy with most executed criminals, but that is irrelevant. It's not a beauty contest. My feelings are best left out of it - unless we want to have a Sharia style of justice.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 09:25 AM

I always have trouble justifying how the people who
often approve of the death penalty are against abortion.
If life is so sacred , why is it different at different
ages and stages?

Very true. And it applies the other way round as well.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Rapparee
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 08:44 AM

We tend to argue this, as we argue other things, one a case-by-case basis, almost ad hominem. (I have no single case in mind here. This is a composite of cases I know of.)

Consider it this way instead: if someone is convicted of serial murder -- and I mean that the his fingerprints and DNA were found on the bodies, on the axe the dead were chopped up with, in the garage where the chopping was done, on the videotapes he made when he was doing the killing, on the clothing of the victims, and on the plates and utensils he ate parts of his victims with -- would the greatest good for society be served by his execution or by letting him live out his life in prison?

In prison, there is the possibility of escape or even release. With execution, there is no hope of studying him, of finding out what made him the way he became. With execution, there is also no possibility of him repeating horrific crimes.

Don't consider vengenance or "closure" in your answer -- look only to serving the greatest good for society.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:08 AM

Let me say that first: I'm against death penalty but I would kill tyrants in some situations.

Two arguments I have read here I consider not well thought:

(1) How someone can be against death penalty with the argument that life imprisonment is the worse sentence I cannot understand.

(2) 'One's too many' is a bad argument. It is a decision under uncertainty and it has two possibilities of error: An innocent man is sentenced and a guilty man walks free. You cannot eliminate both errors at the same time, you only can minimise one error at the expense of the other one.

Surely you all remember enough cases in which a (later found guilty) man has walked free and has been caught after some more ugly murders. Would you say about the women tortured before being killed 'one's too many' and therefore plead for life imprisonment at the slightest suspicion? You wouldn't.

'One's too many' is an emotional appeal without giving a deep thought.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 04:48 AM

Bugger the shooters...

(A case for prison?)

:D

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Ben Dover
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 03:26 AM

Shoot the buggers!

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: LadyJean
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 12:58 AM

Lawyers, judges, and juries are all fallible people. If you lock someone like Hurricane Carter up for life, you can, when he is proven innocent, say "Ooops!" and let him go. That is my chief objection to capital punishment.
My other objection is that it's much too nice for most killers. A child killer either does time in solitary, or risks his life among his fellow inmates, who will be only too happy to beat the tar out of him. This goes double for a child molester.
Charles Manson's women weren't executed. Instead they have to live, every day with the knowledge that they followed a lunatic, and killed innocent people. They aren't happy about it. If Timothy McVeigh had been allowed to live, he might have come to a similar conclusion. McVeigh, incidentally HATED being in prison, and was happy to be executed. Which is a great reason to let him live!

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Peace
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 12:21 AM

ClintonHammond

're "One is too amny", I don't agree with them.'

You first!

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 09:57 PM

Zackelly, Bobert, zackelly. But faith can have so many VIEWPOINTS! :~)

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 09:55 PM

Good point, WYS-------. Yeah, sometimes that is our only perspective but, just as in the three legged stool, faith is paramount becuase, like life, it runs on the ragged edge of possibilities...

Three legged stools' 'er not, I'm still opposed to that a state that justifies killing people...

Bobert

Subject: The Anglican View from the Three-Legged Stool
From: wysiwyg
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 09:45 PM

Although I am most certainly a believing and professing Christian, it is not the only source for my values and beliefs. It's easy to assume that everything that comes from me is Bible-centered, but it's not accurate. Also, even from just the view of me as Christian, us Anglicans are usually a pretty hard lot to pin down on any issue-- we keep insisting on bringing a third view into situations most folks are content to polarize-- for us, we look to Scripture, Tradition, AND Reason. We call it our three-legged stool, and it often seems like we can sit on it temporizing all damn day. Why? Cuz it's one way we pray, as we look around us with the 365 degree view a stool affords, keeping all three legs under us, resisting offers to cut off any of them-- and persisting in reflecting on the mysteries visible from that place. Me, I like to spin on mine. Hardi, on the other hand, enjoys the fiddle tune, "The Stool of Repentance." Go figure.

There is still no substitute for actually getting to know a human being. :~)

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 07:36 PM

Cruiser;

I mean no disrespect but one cannot got from being a devout Christain to being an atheist... It's really not possible....

Church attender to atheist? Sure.

Alter boy to atheist? Sure.

But once you are hooked up, it's like riding bicycle 'er breathing....

Like I said, I mean no dierespect...

Now back to the basics. Like I said earlier, we either believe in the sanctity of life or we don't...

So it's still a resoundin' *no*....

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Gareth
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 07:33 PM

Mmmm ! - I have no problem with the right of a community to defend it's self, and be it war, or be it the death penalty, well, that is just a question of extent.

I am against the Death penalty as part of the judicial process because of the strain it could put a jury under. Given the possibility of error by a Jury, and this has happened, there is the danger of a wrong decision. To the extent that perhaps murderers and the like who were guilty have walked free. And that is equally a miscarridge of justice.

There is also the problem, as I percieve, it of American Justice, if your poor and/or black you die. If your wealthy ......

And what is it in Texas - new evidence is time limited ???

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 07:22 PM

I think it's funny that most of the people who are pro death penalty are people noone wants to f#ck in the first place.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 07:07 PM

If.. so many ifs...

I'd worry about the ifs IF they happened....

Face it folks... I'm pro death penalty, and nothing anyone here says will ever change that...

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,guest from NW
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:51 PM

"Because NO system is infallible, nor will one ever be..."

that is exactly the reason there should be no death penalty. you gladly, even eagerly, with your televised, popcorn, foam finger bullsh*t, want it to happen even when you admit mistakes will be made. if it was your brother, father, wife, etc. on the receiving end of such a mistake i'll bet you'd sing a different tune.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:43 PM

Which is the perfect reason for handing out custodial sentences as opposed to death sentences.

I rest your case m'lud.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:40 PM

Because NO system is infallible, nor will one ever be...

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:36 PM

Clinton..........are you suggesting that there have been executions in the past where they were NOT certain? Is that why innocent people were executed?

Our judicial system has proved time and time again that it is not infallible, so how can we justify handing out a sentence that is irrevocable?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:33 PM

I'm pro-choice as well...

I think it's funny that most of the people who are against abortion are people no one wants to f#ck in the first place... but that's off topic... so I won't say it...

"people we pay to 'be sure' for us often screw up."

Define 'often'... some say, "One is too many"... I don't agree with them...

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: open mike
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:28 PM

The Center for Attitudinal Healing, started by
Jerry Jampolsky basically defines that the opposite
of love is not hate, the opposite of love is fear.
The priciples of this organization are symbolized
by a woman ( i htink she might have been in Idaho)
whose son was killed. She eventually pardoned the
convicted killer so completely that she adopted him.
this is, or course an extraordinary story, but it
shows how love can overcome.

I am not advocating that if you give them enough love,
hateful, fearful killers will be rehabilitated, and I
do not know the outcome of the people in the story, but
I am trying to find mention of these people, as this
woman was able to give unconditional love and that is
so rare.

On the other hand, if serial killers were stopped early
many lives would be saved...so one life sacrificed for
the greater good of the survival of their future victims
would be good.

I always have trouble justifying how the people who
often approve of the death penalty are against abortion.
If life is so sacred , why is it different at different
ages and stages?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:27 PM

ClintonHammond said do it when we are sure. I agree. The problem is that the people we pay to 'be sure' for us often screw up. Again I'll mention Marshall and Nepoose. The cops pooched it in both cases. Therefore, how do we define certain?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:26 PM

Quietly and quickly does very much increases the likelihood of executing of innocent people. But then, most times, if they are dead noone is going to dig up the evidence proving they were wrongly convicted, so perhaps it's less embarrassing than having this evidence turned up after they've spent years in prison, or on Death Row.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Rapparee
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:05 PM

Were I certain that they did live out their lives in prison in a state of repentance and pentitance....

Were I certain that they actually cared about those they killed....

But rape is a crime of power, of control. So is serial murder. I'm afraid that the only regret of these folks would be that they cannot continue their spree of power and control.

But if society IS going to execute, then it should be done quietly and quickly, as one would clean a dirty toilet or do any other disagreeable job.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Amos
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 05:49 PM

The pain and frustration-- they're the cost of living with a high degree of intentionality as a higher order of motivation than reactivity.

Susan, you say the most INNERESTIN' things sometimes, I swan!! :>)

A

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 05:42 PM

Guest...

Line 'em up, and I will...

Ya really think an extreme case like Paul Bernardo, or Carla Holmolka, or Jeffery Dhamer, or... or... or... would ever be 'pardoned'???? Hell, wasn't Paul Bernardos MOM actually lobbying to have him killed???? Maybe that's another serial killer I'm thinking of...

Sure, there is no 100 percent system... but why should we let that stop us where we are CERTAIN????

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Cruiser
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 05:36 PM

As usual and expected Susan, thank you for your thoughtful reply.

Though you and I are on opposite ends of the religious spectrum, I respect your commitment to your Faith. I just don't understand why you and other Christians, who often exhibit such goodness, kindness, devoutness, etc. don't give yourselves the personal credit you deserve. If I needed to emulate and follow someone down the paths of human righteousness it would be persons like you, my Christian relatives, and some others here that I would seek out for guidance. However, I think all those just mentioned would be righteous without the unnecessary cloak of Godliness, because that goodness and conscience is innate and your religion just helps express those qualities. I know; I am probably completely missing the point. As a former devout Christian, now an atheist, I can not comprehend the wonders of, or the mind of, God.

My logic leads me to the conclusion that Christopher Wilder could not receive justice from a God that my mind reasons as nonexistent. So justice must be meted out here and now.

In all fairness, I want to say that the tragedy mentioned above strengthened my relative's belief in God. I certainly do not understand that, except their grief would have likely driven them insane without some "hope" of seeing their beautiful, wonderful, innocent, daughter again. Therefore, I must give some credit to religious belief, notwithstanding the false "hope" it provides, for helping them get through this nightmare.

Cruiser

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 05:31 PM

Tell that to the grieving family.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 05:25 PM

it's an imperfect world... screws fall out...

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 05:17 PM

Has a rabid dog ever had a posthumous pardon?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 05:14 PM

One puts down a rabbid dog right? So why not do the same with a 'rabbid' person?

The two are no different in my book...

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 04:25 PM

Cruiser, that's exactly my point. If a strong personal feeling can sweep away in one act-- one moment-- a value worked out over my lifetime, then I would suspect it may not be a feeling that would stand the test of time. Yes, as Amos says, of course I would WANT to "snuff" him, but it is my hope that it would not be a desire I would take action to satisfy.

I would hope (for me, I mean), that I would make a conscious choice to treat the feeling as a feeling, not something to be acted upon as a value.

What good are our values if we cannot exert our will to live by them when the crunch comes? Heck, that's when we need to rely on our values the most! The pain and frustration-- they're the cost of living with a high degree of intentionality as a higher order of motivation than reactivity. I am glad to have role models to look to, who have struggled with these issues in their own lives, in response to their own experiences of atrocity. Corrie tenBoom, for one, comes to mind.

As far as "what do Christians believe," we're as varied as any other group, and as human as every other bunch of knowitalls on the planet.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: alanabit
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 04:14 PM

Well actually Clinton, as a US taxpayer, I believe Frank does just that already. I should also add that the USA already seems extraordinarily enthusiastic about locking up people - over half of one per cent of its total population - I believe. Most serious observers would say that if enough money is spent on health and education, crimes of violence evetually start falling as a matter of course. So I wonder if you aren't looking at this problem through a different end of the telescope to some of the rest of us.
Amos.
    I am substantially in agreement with you in your most recent post. My emotional reaction to a horrific murder is the normal human desire to blast the perpetrator off screen as if he was the baddy in a Clint Eastwood movie. That is why it is so important that real life justice should be operated by people with cool heads and no personal involvement.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 04:08 PM

I'd snuff him in a minute.

But as you said, Amos, that isn't what is being talked about here. What's being talked about is a ritual killing that, in common with many people, I believe must ineviably degrade and contaminate any society which indulges in it.

And what confirms that for me is when we have proponenets discussing it, not as a terrible thing that has to be done for the greater common good, but with a kind of relish. That's what I mean by "degrade and contaminate."

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:57 PM

Fine Frank... YOU pay to lock 'em up....

I'd rather see my money spent on important things like health care, schools and roads

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Frankham
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:55 PM

Life imprisonment is the greater punishment if the killer is denied
any parole and must live in a penitent state for the remainder of
his/her life.

Death is too often for killers "a consumation devoutly to be wished" and it doesn't impress upon the killer the heaviness of the deed.
Life imprisonment with no frills and the possibility of a kind of
psychological redemption without a reward other than that of itself
seems to be the best deterrent to me.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Amos
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:50 PM

Alan:

I agree that the wheels of justice have to be cautious as hell and maybe we would be better if there were no death penalty. When I said I would snuff the bastard, I was speaking about a scenario involving the heat of the moment such as hot pursuit. Not the cold reflection of a scheduled execution. Nevertheless, if he had done to a daughter of mine what he did to the many many women itemized in the above link, I would prefer to think he would be snuffed, and that right quickly. Civilized or not.

A

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: alanabit
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:44 PM

I disagree strongly Amos. Society certainly deserves protection from this man. I would have had no more regrets than you if a law enforcement officer had shot him while he was attempting an assault. That is very different from saying we have the right to drag a helpless man (no matter how bad) from a cell and then slaughter him. One of the reasons that civilised lands abandoned this horrible practice was because of the the appalling effect it had on the prison officers and the officials responsible for carrying out the sentence. The fact that many sick/wicked/weak killers may deserve death is neither here nor there. In Britain I felt that the Birmingham Pub Bombers deserved execution. I still do. As it happened, the authorities jugged the wrong people and banged them up for years. One of them even died inside, I believe. Thank God we didn't execute them. I doubt if my admission of being wrong and saying sorry is much use to those whose lives were ruined. I sure am glad that wiser heads than my own prevailed at the time.
When justice becomes perfect, we will be able to carry out capital punishment with a clear conscience. The conundrum is that when justice is perfect, it will mean that people are too. So capital punishment will be both unecessary and unwanted. For the time being, let's just stop this horrible practice anyway. No civilised country carries it out.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: harvey andrews
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:38 PM

Mentally subnormal people were considered "vermin" by the nazi state. A friend of mine had his sister put to death by them. If, according to Christians, all humans are created in God's image,including all so called "vermin", then who draws the line as to who is God's mistake?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Amos
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:10 PM

The longer story of Christopher Wilder can be found here. I'd snuff him in a minute. I am against the wilful extinction of human life. Wilder was less than human. Theory can take you to a point but the ground truth has to be dealt with and this guy was vermin, not homo sapiens.
I wouldn't say that about many people. But read the article on his history and consider the parents.

A

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:02 PM

People who commit murder in its various guises have stated by that act that they are in favour of capital punishment. So, who am I to disagree?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Rapparee
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:00 PM

For me, the question can also come to "When is it acceptable (moral, ethical, whatever) for the State to do what I as an individual am forbidden by the State to do?"

Just as a point of interest: if it wasn't for the death penalty, Jesus of Nazareth couldn't have redeemed mankind.

Subject: RE: BS: Death Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 02:58 PM

"Strongly in favor of it but it's a terrible idea."

I think that's brilliantly put. Sums up the truth that just because we might want something to happen, that doesn't mean it's the right thing to happen.

It seems to me so clear that it does terrible damage to a society to have killing done in its name, that there'd have to be an overwhelmingly strong reason to go against that. And that just doesn't ever appear in these discussions. The suggestion that somehow it makes it better for the relatives of a murder victim just doesn't seem to make any kind of sense to me. I try to imagine myself in that situation, and it just doesn't work.

And I find puzzling how there are always some people who come up with these fantasies about revenge killing, and it reads as if they are enjoying them.

All in all I'm profoundly glad that this is behind us in the continent I live in. And I'm very happy that when they had a referendum in Ireland a couple of years on whether the ban should be included in the constitution, the vote went in favour of that. That's what I'd expect in a truly civilised country, and I'm sure there are at least some other countries where ordinary people would vote that way. Maybe some day even England. Maybe even the USA in time.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: michaelr
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 02:48 PM

You have to ask the fundamental question:

Is it OK for a human to kill another, under whatever circumstances?

That will give you your answer. To me, it's no.

Cheers,
Michael

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: harvey andrews
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 02:22 PM

Cruiser, if the parents were Christians, surely they, above all others should be against the death penalty? Or did I miss something in all those sermons I listened to at school and the studies I made of the Bible.Christians surely follow the word of their prophet Christ. Is there another name for those who follow the pre-Christ Old testament writings which cannot be considered Christian?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Rapparee
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 01:52 PM

As a human, as a thinking human, as a humane human, I'm against it.

As a human who sees the ugly things that are done, things by folks with names like John Wayne Gazcy and Jeffrey Dahmer and Albert Fish and Heinrich Himmler and H. H. Mudge and Ian Brady and John Haigh and Elizabeth Bathory and Giles de Rais and so very many others, I can only say that it certainly does have a low recidivism rate.

The question in my mind is whether or not the person could be returned to society after rehabilitation or whether they are so far gone, what they have done is so despicable, that society uses the ultimate "casting out".

Could Sawney Bean and his family have been rehabbed? Peter Kurtin? Henri Landrau? Belle Guinness?

I don't know. I can say that I that the world as a whole is better off without some of these folks, however.