fort hood

[Lavrans]

Originally Posted by frenchie

That sentence starts off "I confess", Lavrans.

And it's about how I feel, not about what I think.


When I read that he was alive, my gut reaction was "YEAH!!!"

I just felt tired. I felt sad for the parents and friends, but mostly it just makes me tired to hear about these things. I have it in me somewhere to do all of the things that people do, but a killing spree is just too easy. It's weak, an example of weakness, like war- while some have the opportunity to act as heroes, the whole thing is merely an act of weak men giving in to their most base desires. If they get to do so, at what point do I let go of my personal injunctions against such actions? Another example of humanity's weakness that bolsters the rest of the people's weakness as they chortle and cry for vengeance. Weakness on all parts.

As for the executioners & guards angle... if you could give me a justice system that I trusted a bit more in how it uses the death penalty, I could do that job. No qualms; I just think some folks need killing. Does that make me "worse"?

Worse? It depends on how you structure your position. It's impossible to have a just system within a police or penal system when organized in a military style. The military is inherently amoral, and must defend all of its actions as justified and correct, no matter what the actions are. If you can find a system where the guards watch each other with as much vigilance as they do the prisoners, then you might be able to do it without becoming equal to the people you guard. If you can make the leap to understand that your actions toward a prisoner shouldn't be judged by what that prisoner has done- IOW, if you beat MNH because of what he did, you should be judged exactly as if you had just beaten a child. And if you see another guard beat MNH, you should act as though that guard was abusing his authority just as much as if they were beating a child. A guard should be held to the higher standard- their actions toward a prisoner should be treated just as if they were against an innocent, private citizen. Why? Because otherwise they have given up their moral authority.

Really, in the real world, it would make you "worse". Not so much for what it does to the prisoners, but because you give up your humanity to be part of a system of torture.

[frenchie]

Originally Posted by Dick Seibert

Don't worry guys, he's in Texas, they execute at the drop of a 10 gallon hat down there.

Be tried under UCMJ, anyways, wouldn't he?

[Lavrans]

Originally Posted by Dick Seibert

Don't worry guys, he's in Texas, they execute at the drop of a 10 gallon hat down there.

Well, yeah. Heck, as it's texas, they might just bring back the guillotine and the public execution for this one, too.

Yep- candy and bands, bring the kids and make a picnic out of it.

[Dick Seibert]

Frenchie:

You are right, I wasn't thinking, on Federal land the State of Texas wouldn't have jurisdiction. Course they might lynch him first.

[frenchie]

Originally Posted by Lavrans

I just felt tired. I felt sad for the parents and friends, but mostly it just makes me tired to hear about these things. I have it in me somewhere to do all of the things that people do, but a killing spree is just too easy. It's weak, an example of weakness, like war- while some have the opportunity to act as heroes, the whole thing is merely an act of weak men giving in to their most base desires.

I hear you, on all of that.

If they get to do so, at what point do I let go of my personal injunctions against such actions?

But no that. You, of all people, can't seriously be telling me you base your actions, or you moral code, on others' behavior?

Another example of humanity's weakness that bolsters the rest of the people's weakness as they chortle and cry for vengeance. Weakness on all parts.

S'why I started the sentence with "confess".

Worse? It depends on how you structure your position. It's impossible to have a just system within a police or penal system when organized in a military style. The military is inherently amoral, and must defend all of its actions as justified and correct, no matter what the actions are. If you can find a system where the guards watch each other with as much vigilance as they do the prisoners, then you might be able to do it without becoming equal to the people you guard. If you can make the leap to understand that your actions toward a prisoner shouldn't be judged by what that prisoner has done- IOW, if you beat MNH because of what he did, you should be judged exactly as if you had just beaten a child. And if you see another guard beat MNH, you should act as though that guard was abusing his authority just as much as if they were beating a child. A guard should be held to the higher standard- their actions toward a prisoner should be treated just as if they were against an innocent, private citizen. Why? Because otherwise they have given up their moral authority.

Really, in the real world, it would make you "worse". Not so much for what it does to the prisoners, but because you give up your humanity to be part of a system of torture.

I wasn't talking about guarding, just executing. I'd suck at guarding. You ever read New Jack? Pretty interesting book.

[Lavrans]

Originally Posted by frenchie

But no that. You, of all people, can't seriously be telling me you base your actions, or you moral code, on others' behavior?

Heh. Nope, it's not based on their behavior, but their behavior often makes me wonder if it's worth keeping to a moral code.

S'why I started the sentence with "confess".

Yeah- I didn't catch that until you referenced it later- and I do understand the reaction. I just don't have it myself- but I do find it interesting.

I wasn't talking about guarding, just executing. I'd suck at guarding. You ever read New Jack? Pretty interesting book.

Haven't read that one, although it looks interesting. I have spent some time with a number of people who worked in and around the penal system- from city and county jails in the municipal police to federal prisons. I also know my fair share of people who've spent varying amounts of time in jails & prisons- what I found interesting is that both told pretty much the same story, even guards who are/were working as guards. They also all had the same set of rules of conduct toward fellows- very, very... tribal? Gang? It's what made me understand why uniforms (both formal and informal) are so important.

[frenchie]

Originally Posted by Lavrans

Heh. Nope, it's not based on their behavior, but their behavior often makes me wonder if it's worth keeping to a moral code.

Yeah, right. Because that would really matter? You don't do it because it's worth it, you do it to be able to look at yourself in the mirror.

Haven't read that one, although it looks interesting. I have spent some time with a number of people who worked in and around the penal system- from city and county jails in the municipal police to federal prisons. I also know my fair share of people who've spent varying amounts of time in jails & prisons- what I found interesting is that both told pretty much the same story, even guards who are/were working as guards. They also all had the same set of rules of conduct toward fellows- very, very... tribal? Gang?

Never mind the book, then. I've known only a few cons, and no guards. It was an interesting read, for me... maybe not so much, for you.

It's what made me understand why uniforms (both formal and informal) are so important.

I did a double-take when I read that. My dad & every male adult I knew, growing up, wore a uniform to work every day. And I wore a uniform 3 times a week, all through my teens.

Anyways - yeah. Wearing uniforms definitely taps into something hard-wired, deep in the human brain.

[Johnson]

Originally Posted by frenchie

Tim McVeight acted out of political, not personal, motives.

So did the Ft Hood killer. We are at war with radical Islam, he didn't want to partake in killing this enemy, but rather kill those who did. How much more political do you need?

[Johnson]

Originally Posted by Lavrans

I just felt tired. I felt sad for the parents and friends, but mostly it just makes me tired to hear about these things. I have it in me somewhere to do all of the things that people do, but a killing spree is just too easy. It's weak, an example of weakness, like war- while some have the opportunity to act as heroes, the whole thing is merely an act of weak men giving in to their most base desires. If they get to do so, at what point do I let go of my personal injunctions against such actions? Another example of humanity's weakness that bolsters the rest of the people's weakness as they chortle and cry for vengeance. Weakness on all parts.



Worse? It depends on how you structure your position. It's impossible to have a just system within a police or penal system when organized in a military style. The military is inherently amoral, and must defend all of its actions as justified and correct, no matter what the actions are. If you can find a system where the guards watch each other with as much vigilance as they do the prisoners, then you might be able to do it without becoming equal to the people you guard. If you can make the leap to understand that your actions toward a prisoner shouldn't be judged by what that prisoner has done- IOW, if you beat MNH because of what he did, you should be judged exactly as if you had just beaten a child. And if you see another guard beat MNH, you should act as though that guard was abusing his authority just as much as if they were beating a child. A guard should be held to the higher standard- their actions toward a prisoner should be treated just as if they were against an innocent, private citizen. Why? Because otherwise they have given up their moral authority.

Really, in the real world, it would make you "worse". Not so much for what it does to the prisoners, but because you give up your humanity to be part of a system of torture.

I didn't know if I should I gag myself with a spoon or stick a fork in my eye when reading this?

[OBConstruction]

Originally Posted by Alex_Saloutos

This was just posted on the New York Times website about 15 minutes ago. This woman is a hero:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/07/us/07police.html?hp

As she pulled up to the center, the officer, Sgt. Kimberly Denise Munley, spotted the gunman, later identified as Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, brandishing a pistol and chasing a wounded soldier outside the building, said Chuck Medley, the director of emergency services at the base.

Sergeant Munley — a woman with a fierce love of hunting, surfing and other outdoor sports — bolted from her car, yanked her pistol out and shot at Major Hasan. He turned on her and began to fire. She ran toward him, continuing to fire, and both she and Major Hasan went down with several bullet wounds, Mr. Medley said.

Whether Sergeant Munley was solely responsible for taking down Major Hasan or whether he was also hit by gunfire from her partner is unclear, but she was the first to fire at him, the authorities said.

Sergeant Munley, 34, is an expert in firearms and a member of the SWAT team for the civilian police department on the base, officials said.

Mr. Medley said she had received specific training in a tactic called active shooter protocol, which was intended for this kind of situation.

“She’s absolutely a hero,” he said. “She had the training; she knew what to do. And she had the courage to do it — by doing it she saved countless people’s lives.”

The word "Hero" gets tossed around too much these days. Sgt. Kimberly Denise Munley certainly is one.

I can only imagine what this "active shooter protocol" entails. Apparently it involves running in to a hail of gunfire knowing your aim and training will prevail.

This may sound silly but I can't help but thinking about a Clint Eastwood character or John Wayne character in a toe to toe gunfight, keeping their wits about them while the other shooter empties their weapon. All the while counting on the fact that the person who actually aims wins.

[betterdrywall]

It is not a good thing, This guy should have not have lived to make it to the hospital. We dont need to know his motives ,his madness . why? just so more will come to the conclusion that he was in some way a hero? we dont need anything like that . just put the guy down like a mad dog with rabies and go on with taking care of the people who's lives were changed forever due to his action. call him what ever you want , be PC if you want , but just stand up do the right thing, take him out and kill him. Lavrans I agree, the prison system should be a humane structure, Thats why all gaurds should be armed with high powered pistol shotguns and rifles, We dont need baby sitters for prisoner. There in that place for a reason. they want to get out of line they want to contiune there maddness inside the prison thats ok just shoot them on the spot,with a weapon that delivers a leathal round that will in the end be humane and quick. Do you think for a minute that I will be sad that the leathal round the gaurd is using will go and aid in the destruction of a person that is in prison for murder rape or child molestation ? I guess we could go and ask the child if it is ok to be molested ? I wonder how that would actually feel ,? Hmmmm let see , some fatazz 50 year old man humping himself ontop of a tied down 10 year old girl ? Yeah I really dont give a chit for his life one least little bit . I am just amazed these people are even given a prison to stay in .

[Tom Bainbridge]

the guy is alive and should be kept that way (at least for the moment)

my comment is TOTALY pragmatic. it is vitally important to find out his motive

after that............. the law should deal with him as is appropriate

[Lavrans]

Originally Posted by betterdrywall

Lavrans I agree, the prison system should be a humane structure, Thats why all gaurds should be armed with high powered pistol shotguns and rifles, We dont need baby sitters for prisoner. There in that place for a reason. they want to get out of line they want to contiune there maddness inside the prison thats ok just shoot them on the spot,with a weapon that delivers a leathal round that will in the end be humane and quick. Do you think for a minute that I will be sad that the leathal round the gaurd is using will go and aid in the destruction of a person that is in prison for murder rape or child molestation ?

Here are the two main problems- most of the people who are in prison aren't in for murder, rape, child molestation. Those people make up a very small part of the population. Second problem is that guard- a person who learns how to treat prisoners that way goes home and treats family and other people the same way. Most are just smart enough to keep their behavior within quasi-legal limits, but the guards who learn to live within that system also become dehumanized.

The problem with abusing prisoners isn't really a problem with how the prisoners are treated so much as what type of person is able to do that, or learns to do that.

I guess we could go and ask the child if it is ok to be molested ? I wonder how that would actually feel ,? Hmmmm let see , some fatazz 50 year old man humping himself ontop of a tied down 10 year old girl ? Yeah I really dont give a chit for his life one least little bit . I am just amazed these people are even given a prison to stay in .

That's Frenchie's point- he could do the executing if the system was a little more reliable, but not the guarding. There's also an easy line to branding everyone in prison with the crimes of the worst offenders.

According to the FBI; "In 2004, there were an estimated 1,367,009 violent crimes nationwide. Of these, aggravated assaults comprised 62.5 percent; robbery, 29.4 percent; forcible rape, 6.9 percent; and murder, 1.2 percent.". People convicted of violent crimes make up just over 1/2 of the prison population.

Not good people, but your murderers and rapists only make up about 8%. Really, a lot of the "aggravated assaults" are people who have abused their kids (yeah- remember, roughly 95% of kids who are abused/raped are assaulted by family- well, 95% of boys, and some 80% of girls are abused by direct family members). A really interesting thing I ran into- Women in prison, 56% have been raped before incarceration, 36% before the age of 18, with family doing roughly 80% of the rapes. Nice. Most of those women are in for drug related offenses like robbery & drugs.

Of course, in the population in general, it's estimated that something like 1/3 of women will be raped at some point in their life. Isn't that nice?

Point being, I don't see how you get to the black and white, absolutist treatment of prisoners without treating the society's underlying problems first, otherwise we wind up with problems such as the classic 70s dilemma of incarcerating women for killing their severely abusive husbands, even when they could show that the police had been unwilling to help. Another is pretty common- I know many kids who've gone this route- get abused at home, get put into foster care, get abused in foster care, run away from home, live on the streets for several years with occasional excursions to juvies but never get any real help on the way. What do you do with that kid when it turns out he's gotten addicted to drugs or become an alcoholic and is a thief to support his/her habits? It's just not so simple, and really is easiest judged only when you're ignorant.

So- that also leads us back to the circuitous reason why it's good to know MNH's motives- not the direct motive of what he did, that's obvious, but how he got to that point. If you aren't going to call it insanity, then you have no choice but to call it a conditioned or reasoned action. If it's either of those, then there's a direct, reasonable path to how he got there, which also means that it's possible to catch a person somewhere on that route and reason them off that path to one that's more acceptable.

[Dick Seibert]

Lavrans:

I'm surprised that you haven't mentioned the Stanford Prison Experiment conducted by Professor Philip Zambardo. The results were so horrifying that they shut the experiment down and controlling organizations like the American Psychological Association made such experiments verboten. This study shook academia and society at it's roots, I was appalled when they shut it down and then made such experiments illegal, talk about burning the books you don't like!

[Alex_Saloutos]

Originally Posted by Dick Seibert

Lavrans:

I'm surprised that you haven't mentioned the Stanford Prison Experiment conducted by Professor Philip Zambardo. The results were so horrifying that they shut the experiment down and controlling organizations like the American Psychological Association made such experiments verboten. This study shook academia and society at it's roots, I was appalled when they shut it down and then made such experiments illegal, talk about burning the books you don't like!

The psyche is so delicate in some ways and something we still have so much to learn about. Even the most emotionally healthy of us may be still be walking within inches of the edge at one time or another.