108 Comments
User's avatar
Dan McCarthy's avatar

We’ve been taking gradual steps towards degeneracy, but this is a big leap. We simply lower ourselves to the same level as the Jihadi barbarians if we go down this path. I am strongly opposed.

Leslie M's avatar

Jihadi barbarians murder innocent people. Not the same at all.

Dan McCarthy's avatar

The fact is they jerk off over watching people get slaughtered. Let's not join them in that endeavor. Let's try and maintain at least *some* dignity.

Leslie M's avatar

Such a “dignified” response.

Dan McCarthy's avatar

From a person who has popcorn at the ready to enhance enjoyment of the slaughter…I’ll take that as a compliment.

Leslie M's avatar

I will not be watching it. We have that choice. And if you equate the military execution of a convicted traitor, terrorist and murderer with the innocent victims of jihadis, it’s impossible to discuss this rationally with you.

Tim Pallies's avatar

I would suggest that the due process involved makes this at least a step or two above barbarians. Now the fact that we do all the shady stuff we do around the world? To me, THAT puts us on the level of the barbarians.

Tim R's avatar

It’s simply a reversion to the norm of human behavior. The thin veneer of “civilized western society” is fading into history.

That said, without a livestream, half of X will claim the guy is still alive and living secretly with Epstein.

Dan McCarthy's avatar

Even *with* a livestream, those same people could say it was a deepfake, or a different guy. Trying to appease fantasists and weirdos is no excuse for sinking to this sad, sad level.

LauraJ's avatar

This is not murder. That's what the perpetrator practiced. The death penalty seems completely reasonable (and a decade overdue) to me. It's the celebratory livestreaming that's disgusting.

Vee's avatar

ARE WE REALLY TALKING ABOUT THIS? The very fact that we are tells us that this is a psychological operation. The exact purpose? I'm not sure. To continue to make things more extreme? To divide the left and right even more? To continue normalizing violence in our already overly violent society?

The real question is, who has actually made the decision to livestream a public execution? Who in the dark shadows has called the shots to make this an actual thing in reality?

This is further proof that we are dealing with spiritual warfare. We are asking the wrong questions when something like this makes it in our consciousness. Mr. Rodgers understood this very well and tried to do something about it. He would be rolling in his grave if he could see what television and screens are being used for.

“I'm so convinced that the space between the television set and the viewer is holy ground. And what we put on the television can, by the Holy Spirit, be translated into what this person needs to hear and see, and without that translation it's all dross as far as I'm concerned.” - Mr. Fred Rodgers

Richard schoenenberger's avatar

Who cleans up the mess? Always, someone has to clean up the mess.

kittynana's avatar

@Richard- not much to clean up. Only one soldier has live ammo. The rest do not.

MaryAnn's avatar

@Kittynana: Did not know this. But would not want to be a member of that squad regardless.

kittynana's avatar

@Richard- I'm a pretty good shot but I wouldn't be guaranteed I'd have the ammo in my gun.

Vee's avatar

It should be the people who decided that this was a good idea.

John Ranger's avatar

First thing that I said was "For goodess'sake, they're just now getting around to this?!" If he'd been quietly disappeared days or MAYBE a few weeks after the deed, we would have gotten on with our lives and an appropriate service to society would've been administered. We do what David did to goliath,

and just move on.

7isheaven's avatar

We have already seen murder online. The victim on the subway. Charlie Kirk. And I’m sure plenty of others. This is visible justice for a change. People can choose not to watch. It should be solemn and serious. The population needs to know death is not a video game.

PJ Maresco's avatar

How was this NOT done sooner? Why does justice take so long in the USA? Was there some ...doubt... about his guilt? I will not tune in but am not opposed to live streaming. Life & death are real, deal with it. Maybe I'm just old and calloused?

Lemmincakes's avatar

I am old and calloused, too, but I won’t be watching. My best guess is those who will are the ones who need to see it the most. Hopefully it will put the fear of God into them and they might think twice before they mow down a bunch of innocents.

Skenny's avatar

It would be more interesting if citizens could apply to serve on the firing squad(s). Maybe a lotto...

Dr. Molly Rutherford's avatar

I like that idea. Husband would be all about it.

Lori's avatar

Sign me up.

Dr. Molly Rutherford's avatar

He killed 14 people. One of the women he killed was pregnant. I did not know he graduated from my alma mater. Two homicidal maniacs (at least) at VT, while my sons had zero chance of getting accepted there. I don't have strong opinions about it being public, but I have no desire to watch. I do hope the firing squad is all men (sorry, couldn't resist).

Lori's avatar

He killed a child in the womb. Now I want to piss on his body as soon as he crumbles to the ground.

Skenny's avatar

It's hard to imagine being the husband of that pregnant woman, living all these years knowing that vile piece of s**t murdered your wife and unborn child while she begged for mercy for that child. The system inflicts cruel and unusual punishment on her surviving family, and all the other victims and families, while coddling that sub-human, worthless animal. Televised or not, get on with his punishment.

Lemmincakes's avatar

It’s my understanding that if a woman is involved they don’t enter into whatever they call their heaven. I wonder if that is true? If so, maybe at least one woman?

GrammySue's avatar

The livestream is not for Americans. It is for the world to see our response to terrorism. The people inclined to repeat this man’s crimes need to see the penalty. It is deterrence, plain and simple. In my opinion it should be a hanging, which is more humiliating.

Jenna McCarthy's avatar

I think the problem with that argument is that this is not really a deterrent to jihadists. They believe that dying for Allah is noble. “Look at the attention, the notoriety! That could be me!” 🙈

Lori's avatar

BOOM SHAKALAKA!

Jpeach's avatar

I will not tune in. I’m good with just knowing he is not wasting taxpayer money, residing in prison.

Lori's avatar
2hEdited

I for one will be watching. Perhaps it will deter others in the future, maybe it won't. Eye for an Eye.

That demon in a skin suit is foul and fetid and let him crumble to the ground just like he did to his 45 victims. Wish I could be there to piss on his grave or ashes. No forgetting, no forgiving. 45 victims. May he rot in Hell. Next, let's do Fauci.

SteveO's avatar

Irina was a public execution and the executioner was given sympathy by many. Maybe he can be public beheading.

Lori's avatar

I will help with that free of charge.

arrotsevni's avatar

This is for our troops to see if they wish but not for public as a livestream as if causal entertainment. It will find its way to Youtube and every outlet that wants clicks. Public execution reflects poorly on our society and we are not at ISIS or feudal levels of morality where this is deemed required viewing. Life without parole is what he should get. No reprieve. We should operate at our moral standard not their's. To execute like this is to dirty oneself with their vile behavior towards ourselves. We are better than that.

Leslie M's avatar

The punishment for treason is death. Not life without parole. This is a military matter, not a civil crime. I won’t be watching, but it is absolutely nothing like what jihadis do to innocent civilians.

SteveO's avatar

This is the first time I disagree with you.

Next all of the political criminals. You know who they are. Let's roll.

Lori's avatar

Add in Fauci and friends.

Merry McIntyre's avatar

Definitely Billy Boy Gates!!

Lori's avatar

Oh yes, most definitely.

David K's avatar

This can’t be worse than watching Resident Evil. The violence will be less than what’s on TV already. However, live-streaming this so those around the world who don’t like us can use it for propaganda purposes doesn’t seem like a good idea.

Leslie M's avatar

Have they needed public executions for “propaganda purposes” to conduct terror all along? I don’t think so. Maybe it just might be a deterrent to future terrorism and treason.

Daryce Morris's avatar

I’m ashamed to say that I didn’t even know this horrible massacre even took place! I’ve never been one to watch the news but you’d think a story like this would have broke through to my world.

Jenna McCarthy's avatar

#Blessed literally

David Nelson's avatar

Ah, just when things were starting to calm down, ANOTHER reminder that the current administration is run by populists, not conservatives. This is sooo, gratuitously, stupid, and begs the question, "Why invite comparisons to jihadist beheadings?" For heaven's sake, the almighty, unimpeachable government won't even show us the "execution" of what's-his-name, the 9/11 planner.

However, opposition to LIVE-STREAMING EXECUTIONS is not the same thing as opposing executions.

Crimes that DO NOT HAVE CONSEQUENCES, you get MORE of. "It is enough" to establish that "capital crimes end with capital punishment--every time there is no doubt." (I have to add that last because of the track record of the almighty, unimpeachable government's "justice" system.)

However, a society which has given the impression--since 1945--that certain crimes DO NOT HAVE THE ULTIMATE CONSEQUENCE can be arguably guilty of enticement, by giving a false impression. Certainly, the defense can make the case that a "pause" of 81 years has rendered renewed enforcement "capricious" and "arbitrary" and, we can admit, "unusual."

Society IS entitled to execute the worst of its anti-social predators--NOT, as recent popes have mis-opined against historical Church teaching, "to protect itself from future predations," which would involve pretending to know the future, but rather--because... JUSTICE. The crime requires individuals to pay, not Society to continue to pay for the sociopaths' MAINTENANCE.

If it were up to me, I'd offer Hasan a chance to convert to Christianity--a self-imposed death sentence for EVERY Muslim.

Curtis's avatar

He has that opportunity until December 3rd, and I hope he takes it. Ted Bundy did.

Blair Doyle's avatar

The first thing that comes to mind is why didn't law enforcement finish the job at the scene of the crime? Secondly, on mass shootings in general, we need to start researching how many of these lunatics are on SSRIs or other mind altering substances and maybe make some changes in treatment protocols.

Jefff G.'s avatar

All executions should be public for those that want to attend or tune in as they are publicly funded to begin with. If viewing the permanent elimination of a murderer is too much for you, just don't watch it...but don't gripe or condemn those that like to confirm their tax dollars are being put to proper use prior to the last public execution (I believe the person's name was "Raine"), it was common practice for most of a town to show up for a hanging, and it probably would still be if not for the rot of liberalism and bullshit sensitivities.

Jefff G.'s avatar

I forgot to add that my only problem with the use of a firing squad is that it's over too quickly. The POS should be hung..nan inch at a time.