Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Kill him.Because she is dead. His mother died months before the murders. Having said that he is an adult and responsible for his own actions.It should. The law should be applied equally to all people regardless of life circumstancesHe should be executed in the public square on live tv.
That is how we proceed.
All this bullshit about getting off because you're retarded has to stop.
Can I go rob a bank and get off if I have terminal cancer?
Being stupid is not a free pass to commit crimes.
Actually, if the cancer you had was brain cancer, then yeah, you could probably get off.
The law doesn't punish people who are suffering from mental disease or defect.
The law requires responsibility from those who are capable of BEING responsible. That's why we don't prosecute minors as adults. The concept of legally insane and diminished mental capacity has pretty much always been a part of American jurisprudence.
That being said, those who are acknowledged as not capable of average adult competency and responsibility are SUPPOSED to have someone who is as a caretaker, the way children have parents. This little fruitcake should never have been allowed to run around loose at all, and definitely should stay in the mental institution for good.
The question that needs to be addressed is, "Why are we not finding and prosecuting the responsible adults who should have identified his insanity and protected the public from it?"
He deserves nothing less than a painful PUBLUC execution.
We either coddle killers for life or do what must be done for the protection of society.
No, he's nuts, and he SHOULD have been in an institution long before he ever got around to shooting up a school.
He is NOT capable of being responsible for his actions.
And locking up hopelessly deranged people is not "coddling". You want so badly to look tough and no-nonsense that you sound just as irrational as people who don't want to prosecute criminals at all.
Well, there is a question of timing and truthfulness to this.If he is legitimately suffering from a disability, how can we hold him accountable? It's difficult to watch some pos who committed such a crime get a life of a mental ward rather than a prison or a chair, but we must be honest about it if it's the case that he does not have his faculties. As far as I am concerned, if someone has a mental disability and provided all the warning signs, there is plenty of blame to go around.
However, if he was just enraged, angry and lashing out, randomly slaying people in the way he did, certainly deserves the toughest sentence that the law provides.
Let's not forget how convinced so many were that he was going to snap. None of the kids were surprised he did it, many knew it was him before they even knew it was him. That says alot. Something wasn't right with this guy. Now was it just emotional rage, or actual mental deficit? Very different situations.
Well, there is a question of timing and truthfulness to this.If he is legitimately suffering from a disability, how can we hold him accountable? It's difficult to watch some pos who committed such a crime get a life of a mental ward rather than a prison or a chair, but we must be honest about it if it's the case that he does not have his faculties. As far as I am concerned, if someone has a mental disability and provided all the warning signs, there is plenty of blame to go around.
However, if he was just enraged, angry and lashing out, randomly slaying people in the way he did, certainly deserves the toughest sentence that the law provides.
Let's not forget how convinced so many were that he was going to snap. None of the kids were surprised he did it, many knew it was him before they even knew it was him. That says alot. Something wasn't right with this guy. Now was it just emotional rage, or actual mental deficit? Very different situations.
He did not exhibit (to anyone's recollection) this kind of behavior before the incident. So, then two questions must be answered before anything can be done.
Is the stress of what he has done drove him to this psychotic break or is he faking this to avoid execution? If the former, then
He would have to placed in a mental facility for the rest of his life or until he returns back to a state of mental fitness to stand trail for his actions, which should be a death penalty conviction. Or,
His faking this is proof that he knew and planned what he had done and is now trying to avoid the consequences of that action.
In either case, the outcome will be he dies in a mental facility from old age or abuse, or he dies after he stands trial.
Regardless, he is required to pay for his actions.
Well, there is a question of timing and truthfulness to this.If he is legitimately suffering from a disability, how can we hold him accountable? It's difficult to watch some pos who committed such a crime get a life of a mental ward rather than a prison or a chair, but we must be honest about it if it's the case that he does not have his faculties. As far as I am concerned, if someone has a mental disability and provided all the warning signs, there is plenty of blame to go around.
However, if he was just enraged, angry and lashing out, randomly slaying people in the way he did, certainly deserves the toughest sentence that the law provides.
Let's not forget how convinced so many were that he was going to snap. None of the kids were surprised he did it, many knew it was him before they even knew it was him. That says alot. Something wasn't right with this guy. Now was it just emotional rage, or actual mental deficit? Very different situations.
He did not exhibit (to anyone's recollection) this kind of behavior before the incident. So, then two questions must be answered before anything can be done.
Is the stress of what he has done drove him to this psychotic break or is he faking this to avoid execution? If the former, then
He would have to placed in a mental facility for the rest of his life or until he returns back to a state of mental fitness to stand trail for his actions, which should be a death penalty conviction. Or,
His faking this is proof that he knew and planned what he had done and is now trying to avoid the consequences of that action.
In either case, the outcome will be he dies in a mental facility from old age or abuse, or he dies after he stands trial.
Regardless, he is required to pay for his actions.
Actually, the law does not stop the criminal prosecution of the mentally unstable. It places it on hold until such time as the person if fit to stand trail.Well, there is a question of timing and truthfulness to this.If he is legitimately suffering from a disability, how can we hold him accountable? It's difficult to watch some pos who committed such a crime get a life of a mental ward rather than a prison or a chair, but we must be honest about it if it's the case that he does not have his faculties. As far as I am concerned, if someone has a mental disability and provided all the warning signs, there is plenty of blame to go around.
However, if he was just enraged, angry and lashing out, randomly slaying people in the way he did, certainly deserves the toughest sentence that the law provides.
Let's not forget how convinced so many were that he was going to snap. None of the kids were surprised he did it, many knew it was him before they even knew it was him. That says alot. Something wasn't right with this guy. Now was it just emotional rage, or actual mental deficit? Very different situations.
He did not exhibit (to anyone's recollection) this kind of behavior before the incident. So, then two questions must be answered before anything can be done.
Is the stress of what he has done drove him to this psychotic break or is he faking this to avoid execution? If the former, then
He would have to placed in a mental facility for the rest of his life or until he returns back to a state of mental fitness to stand trail for his actions, which should be a death penalty conviction. Or,
His faking this is proof that he knew and planned what he had done and is now trying to avoid the consequences of that action.
In either case, the outcome will be he dies in a mental facility from old age or abuse, or he dies after he stands trial.
Regardless, he is required to pay for his actions.
It appears he DID exhibit crazy behavior. Quite THIS crazy? Debatable, but I can believe the shooting as the final plunge into full-on madness.
I don't think anyone here is suggesting that we let him walk away scot-free. Certainly, I'm not. But, pending an evaluation from trained mental health professionals, I think the appropriate penalty for his crimes is going to have to be commitment to a mental hospital.
The law does not require treating the insane the same as we treat people who are in full control of their faculties and choose to be evil, nor should it.
And the question still remains: why aren't we doing anything about the people who could have stopped him, and didn't? Why are both sides of this debate refusing to even look at that?
Actually, the law does not stop the criminal prosecution of the mentally unstable. It places it on hold until such time as the person if fit to stand trail.Well, there is a question of timing and truthfulness to this.If he is legitimately suffering from a disability, how can we hold him accountable? It's difficult to watch some pos who committed such a crime get a life of a mental ward rather than a prison or a chair, but we must be honest about it if it's the case that he does not have his faculties. As far as I am concerned, if someone has a mental disability and provided all the warning signs, there is plenty of blame to go around.
However, if he was just enraged, angry and lashing out, randomly slaying people in the way he did, certainly deserves the toughest sentence that the law provides.
Let's not forget how convinced so many were that he was going to snap. None of the kids were surprised he did it, many knew it was him before they even knew it was him. That says alot. Something wasn't right with this guy. Now was it just emotional rage, or actual mental deficit? Very different situations.
He did not exhibit (to anyone's recollection) this kind of behavior before the incident. So, then two questions must be answered before anything can be done.
Is the stress of what he has done drove him to this psychotic break or is he faking this to avoid execution? If the former, then
He would have to placed in a mental facility for the rest of his life or until he returns back to a state of mental fitness to stand trail for his actions, which should be a death penalty conviction. Or,
His faking this is proof that he knew and planned what he had done and is now trying to avoid the consequences of that action.
In either case, the outcome will be he dies in a mental facility from old age or abuse, or he dies after he stands trial.
Regardless, he is required to pay for his actions.
It appears he DID exhibit crazy behavior. Quite THIS crazy? Debatable, but I can believe the shooting as the final plunge into full-on madness.
I don't think anyone here is suggesting that we let him walk away scot-free. Certainly, I'm not. But, pending an evaluation from trained mental health professionals, I think the appropriate penalty for his crimes is going to have to be commitment to a mental hospital.
The law does not require treating the insane the same as we treat people who are in full control of their faculties and choose to be evil, nor should it.
And the question still remains: why aren't we doing anything about the people who could have stopped him, and didn't? Why are both sides of this debate refusing to even look at that?
As for the behavior, the opening post tries to garner sympathy for the guy by showing him exhibiting (yeah, that seems to be My new word of the day!) extreme behavior. He did NOT exhibit that kind of behavior and yes, there were signs he wasn't stable before the incident. I personally think that the government dropped the ball with this guy. That being said, the post I made still applies.
He is either faking it, in which case he needs to die, or he isn't, in which case they need to either make him sane so he can stand trial, or he dies in a mental institution of other circumstance.
Really? I'm an asshole for putting forward two possible lines going forward?Actually, the law does not stop the criminal prosecution of the mentally unstable. It places it on hold until such time as the person if fit to stand trail.Well, there is a question of timing and truthfulness to this.If he is legitimately suffering from a disability, how can we hold him accountable? It's difficult to watch some pos who committed such a crime get a life of a mental ward rather than a prison or a chair, but we must be honest about it if it's the case that he does not have his faculties. As far as I am concerned, if someone has a mental disability and provided all the warning signs, there is plenty of blame to go around.
However, if he was just enraged, angry and lashing out, randomly slaying people in the way he did, certainly deserves the toughest sentence that the law provides.
Let's not forget how convinced so many were that he was going to snap. None of the kids were surprised he did it, many knew it was him before they even knew it was him. That says alot. Something wasn't right with this guy. Now was it just emotional rage, or actual mental deficit? Very different situations.
He did not exhibit (to anyone's recollection) this kind of behavior before the incident. So, then two questions must be answered before anything can be done.
Is the stress of what he has done drove him to this psychotic break or is he faking this to avoid execution? If the former, then
He would have to placed in a mental facility for the rest of his life or until he returns back to a state of mental fitness to stand trail for his actions, which should be a death penalty conviction. Or,
His faking this is proof that he knew and planned what he had done and is now trying to avoid the consequences of that action.
In either case, the outcome will be he dies in a mental facility from old age or abuse, or he dies after he stands trial.
Regardless, he is required to pay for his actions.
It appears he DID exhibit crazy behavior. Quite THIS crazy? Debatable, but I can believe the shooting as the final plunge into full-on madness.
I don't think anyone here is suggesting that we let him walk away scot-free. Certainly, I'm not. But, pending an evaluation from trained mental health professionals, I think the appropriate penalty for his crimes is going to have to be commitment to a mental hospital.
The law does not require treating the insane the same as we treat people who are in full control of their faculties and choose to be evil, nor should it.
And the question still remains: why aren't we doing anything about the people who could have stopped him, and didn't? Why are both sides of this debate refusing to even look at that?
As for the behavior, the opening post tries to garner sympathy for the guy by showing him exhibiting (yeah, that seems to be My new word of the day!) extreme behavior. He did NOT exhibit that kind of behavior and yes, there were signs he wasn't stable before the incident. I personally think that the government dropped the ball with this guy. That being said, the post I made still applies.
He is either faking it, in which case he needs to die, or he isn't, in which case they need to either make him sane so he can stand trial, or he dies in a mental institution of other circumstance.
Hair-splitting. I didn't say the law doesn't allow the prosecution of the mentally unstable. I said it doesn't require treating them the same as people who are sane. And it doesn't, PRECISELY because it allows the prosecution to be postponed until such time as they are competent to stand trial, if that ever happens.
Again, I'm not a psychiatrist, and I haven't even met the guy, so I'm waiting for the professionals who HAVE met with him to issue a statement on his mental condition. Only an asshole presumes to diagnose someone as "crazy" or "faking it" on the Internet with no more evidence than what's available.
The various government agencies involved DEFINITELY dropped the ball with this guy. Repeatedly. They not only dropped it, they dropKICKED it into the tall weeds.
For the record, if he ends up hospitalized and then is at some point judged competent to finally stand trial, it's doubtful they'd go for the death penalty at that point BECAUSE he was mentally ill. It's also doubtful the jury would go along with it, even if the prosecution asked for it.
Really? I'm an asshole for putting forward two possible lines going forward?Actually, the law does not stop the criminal prosecution of the mentally unstable. It places it on hold until such time as the person if fit to stand trail.Well, there is a question of timing and truthfulness to this.If he is legitimately suffering from a disability, how can we hold him accountable? It's difficult to watch some pos who committed such a crime get a life of a mental ward rather than a prison or a chair, but we must be honest about it if it's the case that he does not have his faculties. As far as I am concerned, if someone has a mental disability and provided all the warning signs, there is plenty of blame to go around.
However, if he was just enraged, angry and lashing out, randomly slaying people in the way he did, certainly deserves the toughest sentence that the law provides.
Let's not forget how convinced so many were that he was going to snap. None of the kids were surprised he did it, many knew it was him before they even knew it was him. That says alot. Something wasn't right with this guy. Now was it just emotional rage, or actual mental deficit? Very different situations.
He did not exhibit (to anyone's recollection) this kind of behavior before the incident. So, then two questions must be answered before anything can be done.
Is the stress of what he has done drove him to this psychotic break or is he faking this to avoid execution? If the former, then
He would have to placed in a mental facility for the rest of his life or until he returns back to a state of mental fitness to stand trail for his actions, which should be a death penalty conviction. Or,
His faking this is proof that he knew and planned what he had done and is now trying to avoid the consequences of that action.
In either case, the outcome will be he dies in a mental facility from old age or abuse, or he dies after he stands trial.
Regardless, he is required to pay for his actions.
It appears he DID exhibit crazy behavior. Quite THIS crazy? Debatable, but I can believe the shooting as the final plunge into full-on madness.
I don't think anyone here is suggesting that we let him walk away scot-free. Certainly, I'm not. But, pending an evaluation from trained mental health professionals, I think the appropriate penalty for his crimes is going to have to be commitment to a mental hospital.
The law does not require treating the insane the same as we treat people who are in full control of their faculties and choose to be evil, nor should it.
And the question still remains: why aren't we doing anything about the people who could have stopped him, and didn't? Why are both sides of this debate refusing to even look at that?
As for the behavior, the opening post tries to garner sympathy for the guy by showing him exhibiting (yeah, that seems to be My new word of the day!) extreme behavior. He did NOT exhibit that kind of behavior and yes, there were signs he wasn't stable before the incident. I personally think that the government dropped the ball with this guy. That being said, the post I made still applies.
He is either faking it, in which case he needs to die, or he isn't, in which case they need to either make him sane so he can stand trial, or he dies in a mental institution of other circumstance.
Hair-splitting. I didn't say the law doesn't allow the prosecution of the mentally unstable. I said it doesn't require treating them the same as people who are sane. And it doesn't, PRECISELY because it allows the prosecution to be postponed until such time as they are competent to stand trial, if that ever happens.
Again, I'm not a psychiatrist, and I haven't even met the guy, so I'm waiting for the professionals who HAVE met with him to issue a statement on his mental condition. Only an asshole presumes to diagnose someone as "crazy" or "faking it" on the Internet with no more evidence than what's available.
The various government agencies involved DEFINITELY dropped the ball with this guy. Repeatedly. They not only dropped it, they dropKICKED it into the tall weeds.
For the record, if he ends up hospitalized and then is at some point judged competent to finally stand trial, it's doubtful they'd go for the death penalty at that point BECAUSE he was mentally ill. It's also doubtful the jury would go along with it, even if the prosecution asked for it.
Each of My posts overall implied "IF". I made no diagnosis either way. So you can fuck all the way off.
Nikolas Cruz punches own face, rambles about demons in chilling confession video ⋆ The Savage Nation
This is tragic on so many levels, however, there are some smug SOB's sitting comfy in their chairs after overtly letting sick, depraved & manifestly violent perpetrators, such as Cruz, to skate through the LE system for the sake of financial & personal gain & acclaim.
What are y'all doing in your states since this FL tragedy and how's it going so far? What practical solutions / propositions have bubbled to the surface, that y'all care to share? this Is a damn epidemic, young kids medicated from childhood, in ways that my generation 'X/Y' never was. I do blame the medical community & big pharma for the last two decades of collusion, and the psychologically damaged children that served as laboratory trials for impatient / busy parents and obliging doctors! (U want to talk about collusion... Start here)! take that collusion and multiply it by the collusion of law enforcement w/ the educational system (set up under Obama) and you have an unholy 'Quad-fecta'... some accountability, ramifications & draconian change would be nice!
