LaughingWater
Cathlete
I vote she stays in prison.
Should dying Manson murderer be released?
- Thread starter Aquajock
- Start date
MSJ
Cathlete
I think that she should stay in prison.
As a born again Christian myself, I must accept that there are consequences for my behavior and although I have ultimate forgiveness through Christ, that doesn't give me a pass here in this world.
The Lord has been very gracious to me, but there are consequences I experience even to this day for decisions I made before I became a Christian. I must submit to this reality and I think that Ms. Atkins should as well.
I truly hope her faith is genuine, but only God knows the heart.
Maggie
As a born again Christian myself, I must accept that there are consequences for my behavior and although I have ultimate forgiveness through Christ, that doesn't give me a pass here in this world.
The Lord has been very gracious to me, but there are consequences I experience even to this day for decisions I made before I became a Christian. I must submit to this reality and I think that Ms. Atkins should as well.
I truly hope her faith is genuine, but only God knows the heart.
Maggie
GreenEyedLefty
Cathlete
Susan Atkins did a heinous thing, to be sure, but she tried, in her 40-ish years behind bars, to redeem herself in some way. I think that should count for something.
At any rate, it doesn't make much difference if she's released or not. She's going to die, in either event.
At any rate, it doesn't make much difference if she's released or not. She's going to die, in either event.
crazystepr
Cathlete
>From a purely economic standpoint, if she is released, the
>state and the taxpayers don't have the obligation of paying
>for her on-going medical and hospice care.
That's the only reason why I would vote for her release. If she stays in jail, OUR money is being spent to care for her and prolong her despicable life.
Having said that, I think she should remain in prison. I couldn't, in good conscience, vote for her release just because I don't want to pay for her care. She did the crime, time to finish her time.
Allison
http://www.picturetrail.com/allisonj90
>state and the taxpayers don't have the obligation of paying
>for her on-going medical and hospice care.
That's the only reason why I would vote for her release. If she stays in jail, OUR money is being spent to care for her and prolong her despicable life.
Having said that, I think she should remain in prison. I couldn't, in good conscience, vote for her release just because I don't want to pay for her care. She did the crime, time to finish her time.
Allison
http://www.picturetrail.com/allisonj90
janiejoey
Cathlete
I remember those horrific days of the Manson family attacks on those poor people. Very sick indeed.
Susan Atkins has been in prison most of her life. I can only question what she would do outside of prison. How could she even function in society? She wouldn't know how to exist. Her time is short and I understand she is doing good as a Born Again Christian and helping others as well in that religion. She should stay in prison and continue and finish her work there.
I hope that when she passes, that she indeed can look back into her life and remember some good she did for another human being or cause.
Janie
[/url]
The idea is to die young as late as possible.
Susan Atkins has been in prison most of her life. I can only question what she would do outside of prison. How could she even function in society? She wouldn't know how to exist. Her time is short and I understand she is doing good as a Born Again Christian and helping others as well in that religion. She should stay in prison and continue and finish her work there.
I hope that when she passes, that she indeed can look back into her life and remember some good she did for another human being or cause.
Janie
The idea is to die young as late as possible.
pixiesis
Cathlete
I agree with Sparrow that the victims' family should have a say. Personally, I see both sides, but I guess that I lean towards letting her die at home. Her evil deeds will never be undone; no amount of prison time will make up for them. It's not that I think she deserves forgiveness for her acts--I just think that sometimes in some cases there is room for a small amount of compassion.
I know she didn't have mercy for her victims, but it's important to me that we as a society are willing to show more mercy and compassion than criminals are capable of, when it is wise to do so of course. Since she is so ill that she cannot hurt anyone, and since she seems to have reformed to an extent, this might be an instance where compassion is appropriate. It's not because criminals deserve it, but rather because we as a society possess greater wisdom and are better than criminals. Sometimes it is better to err on the side of compassion rather than punishment and I think this may apply here.
That said, if the victims' families want her to stay in prison, I would support that 100%.
I know she didn't have mercy for her victims, but it's important to me that we as a society are willing to show more mercy and compassion than criminals are capable of, when it is wise to do so of course. Since she is so ill that she cannot hurt anyone, and since she seems to have reformed to an extent, this might be an instance where compassion is appropriate. It's not because criminals deserve it, but rather because we as a society possess greater wisdom and are better than criminals. Sometimes it is better to err on the side of compassion rather than punishment and I think this may apply here.
That said, if the victims' families want her to stay in prison, I would support that 100%.
Aquajock
Cathlete
One of the aspects of this situation that made my jaw drop is the fact that Susan Atkins is married - to a lawyer, no less. Just as a side note, who in his right mind would, as a non-incarcerated citizen, marry an incarcerated mass murderer? No matter how long ago the crimes?
I'm curious how this will play out. Apparently the prison in which she is incarcerated has green-lighted her request, and the decision is now in the hands of the California Corrections system. Which has no timetable it has to meet.
A-Jock
I'm curious how this will play out. Apparently the prison in which she is incarcerated has green-lighted her request, and the decision is now in the hands of the California Corrections system. Which has no timetable it has to meet.
A-Jock
MSJ
Cathlete
I posed this issue to my dh on the way to church this morning. And he felt that they should let her out, which is the opposite of my opinion--needless to say, we had a friendly debate about the whole thing. His position largely coincided with Amy's (pixiesis).
I shouldn't have been surprised--he "errs" more on the side of grace and I "err" more on the side of justice on a whole host of issues.
It made for stimulating conversation anyway. I'll be interested to see how it all plays out.
Maggie
I shouldn't have been surprised--he "errs" more on the side of grace and I "err" more on the side of justice on a whole host of issues.
It made for stimulating conversation anyway. I'll be interested to see how it all plays out.
Maggie
I want her locked up and enjoying NO FREEDOM whatsoever until the end. PERIOD.
With respect to the notion that the taxpayers would not have to pay for her continued medical care if she were released, I'm not so sure that would be the case. What money or insurance would she have to pay for her own medical care? Unless she has family "on the outside" waiting to take care of her at their expense, us as taxpayers will probably continue to pay for her care in the form of Medicaid. But at this point, we've paid to keep her up this long (when she should have been gone many years ago pursuant to her original sentence), what's a few more months to ensure that she serves everyday of her sentence? LIFE. I can't imagine anything more brutal than stabbing to death a woman who is 8-months pregnant.
ETA - just read in another post that she is married - so conceivably, there is someone who could pay for her medical care - and not us. Still, I don't care. She doesn't deserve compassion.
With respect to the notion that the taxpayers would not have to pay for her continued medical care if she were released, I'm not so sure that would be the case. What money or insurance would she have to pay for her own medical care? Unless she has family "on the outside" waiting to take care of her at their expense, us as taxpayers will probably continue to pay for her care in the form of Medicaid. But at this point, we've paid to keep her up this long (when she should have been gone many years ago pursuant to her original sentence), what's a few more months to ensure that she serves everyday of her sentence? LIFE. I can't imagine anything more brutal than stabbing to death a woman who is 8-months pregnant.
ETA - just read in another post that she is married - so conceivably, there is someone who could pay for her medical care - and not us. Still, I don't care. She doesn't deserve compassion.
intensityjunkie
Cathlete
Stay in prison.
intensityjunkie
Cathlete
>My first thought was to keep her locked up because she showed
>no mercy or compassion for her victims. However, after much
>thought and discussion with other people, I realized that if
>we (as a society) show no mercy or compassion, aren't we just
>as bad as she is?
>
>
>
No. Its called consequences. And if people don't have them then more people will want to commit things they shouldn't. She has had mercy by getting life instead of the death penalty. We are not "bad" by wanting criminals punished.
>no mercy or compassion for her victims. However, after much
>thought and discussion with other people, I realized that if
>we (as a society) show no mercy or compassion, aren't we just
>as bad as she is?
>
>
>
No. Its called consequences. And if people don't have them then more people will want to commit things they shouldn't. She has had mercy by getting life instead of the death penalty. We are not "bad" by wanting criminals punished.
Should dying Manson murderer be released?
No. It's not about rehabilitation or mercy when someone is sentenced to prison for life; it's about being punished for committing a horrible crime. In her case, she basically tortured and killed someone, and seemed to take pleasure in it. If she is allowed to be released because she's dying, after what she did, how can they say no to anyone else who asked for the same thing?
No. It's not about rehabilitation or mercy when someone is sentenced to prison for life; it's about being punished for committing a horrible crime. In her case, she basically tortured and killed someone, and seemed to take pleasure in it. If she is allowed to be released because she's dying, after what she did, how can they say no to anyone else who asked for the same thing?
jennifersmom
Cathlete
No!!!! She is evil. I thought she killed Abigail Folger and husband.
But it was 8.5 months Sharon Tate. Horrible. Leslie Van Houghton
killed the Folgers. I know she is always trying to get out.
She has been interviewed on occassion. Seems like a normal, decent person but she too lacks a conscience and too will never see the
light of day. The last interview with Charles Mason was over 12 years
ago. The state of California will no longer allow cameras in to
tape him and a few others, which I am sure Manson hates.
Suzanne
But it was 8.5 months Sharon Tate. Horrible. Leslie Van Houghton
killed the Folgers. I know she is always trying to get out.
She has been interviewed on occassion. Seems like a normal, decent person but she too lacks a conscience and too will never see the
light of day. The last interview with Charles Mason was over 12 years
ago. The state of California will no longer allow cameras in to
tape him and a few others, which I am sure Manson hates.
Suzanne