Forum - View topicNEWS: Otaku Murderer Death Sentence Upheld
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Killuadl
 Posts: 14 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
Wait a minute, otakus had a good name?
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
CCSYueh
 Posts: 2707 Location: San Diego, CA |
|
|||||||||||||
You sound a bit harsh, there. I actually support the death penalty, agreeing with a comment of Psycho author Robert Bloch that the death penalty doesn't prevent others from commiting murder, but that modern society can't tolerate killers--a civil society has no place for animals. However, I found the article slightly disquieting-- "After a 7-year trial Miyazaki was sentenced to death by the Tokyo District Court in 1997, a ruling that was later upheld by the Tokyo High Court in 2001 and by the Supreme Court today. In each trial, the defence argued that Miyazaki was mentally ill. Japanese law allows for the sentences of mentally ill criminals to be reduced. Psychiatric evaluations of Miyazaki found that he had multiple personality disorder and was schizophrenic. One evaluation by Tokyo University psychiatrists found that he had a "personality disorder" but was aware of the gravity of his crimes, while another evaluation found that he had a "mental disorder." The court accepted the first evaluation." So if he had killed grown women or men, he might have been found insane & had his sentence reduced? My brother-in-law was schizophrenic--missed a court date over a minor ticket, got worried & threw himself off the Golden Gate Bridge. They like familiar which is why they're fond of street drugs--they usually did them for years before someone recognized their disorders. My brother-in-law would ask every day if he needed the medicine the doctors prescribed & I would tell him yes. He went back to the Bay Area, & went off his meds, I know because his street friends would tell him he didn't need them, here's some pot. He liked marijuana because it was familiar--he knew the feel of it. I work with people on a regular basis with mental disorders & am regularly shocked at the attitudes of otherwise intelligent adults that "these people pay for their crimes" when "these people" are obviously not all there. I can usually pick it up pretty quickly in a conversation. Some of these clients tell me all the time they don't need their meds(yeah, that's why you were busted for meth, right? Self medicating). If he were a vile heartless killer & Japan regularly did this, yeah, hang the man. But if it's just a knee-jerk reaction because of the severity of what he did overriding a failsafe common to the Japanese justice system, then it's wrong. If the man is a schizophrenic with multiple personality disorder, this is just revenge because he won't really grasp what they're doing to him. Isn't a swift death actually putting him out of his misery while life in prison gives him years to think about what he did to get himself there? |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
pinoyfreestyler
Posts: 102 Location: Makati, Philippines |
|
|||||||||||||
|
Maybe if he just killed one, then maybe he can at least get imprisoned for life.
But he killed more than just one child, killed four to be precise. I believe that multiple murdering of people should grant the death penalty with no questions asked. I believe personally that this freak should just be executed by hanging although I was hoping for beheading or chopping of limbs (like in Kill Bill Vol. 1  ).
Even if I'm a catholic and even if the church discourages death penalty, I believe that they're are exceptions (such as in the case of the "Otaku Murderer") wherein capital punishment must be applied & enforced. Besides, even in CLE/religion classes in school and even in the Bible, it states what Jesus said: "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth." If we really take into context what the above says, then this guy would automatically be sentenced IF he commits just one purposedly-done murder/intentional act of killing. Nevertheless, I'm thankful the freak would be executed and good thing he was caught without any delay so that he wouldn't continue his psychotic rampage of innocent killings. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Cowpunk
Posts: 168 Location: Oakland - near the Newtype Lab |
|
|||||||||||||
|
Regarding the thousands of videos I just checked the article and it does not mention anime or a video collection at all.
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
JELEINEN
 Posts: 253 Location: Iowa |
|
|||||||||||||
Prior to the Miyazaki murders, "otaku" would have been about as bad as calling someone a "nerd" or "loser." The media had a feeding frenzy once they caught Miyazaki and being labeled an otaku was really bad. From what I understand though, it's turned around a lot recently, especially in the last year or so. Personally, I'm on the fence when it comes to the death penalty, but if there was a case where I'd support it, it would be for people like Miyazaki. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Tempest
 I Run this place.ANN Publisher  Posts: 10421 Location: Do not message me for support. |
|
|||||||||||||
|
I've fixed the green link.
Yes, Japan has the Death Penalty, otherwise they wouldn't sentence someone to death. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11306-2005Jan15.html |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Tempest
I Run this place. ANN Publisher Posts: 10421 Location: Do not message me for support. |
|
|||||||||||||
Uhh... Jesus is not quoted in the bible as saying that. In fact he's quoted disagreeing with that statement.
Later, in Romans:
The "Eye for an Eye" statement comes from the old testament. Not certain of the exact source, but I'm sure you can find it if you look it up. (ps: I'm not judao/christian/islamic, I just happen to know a lot about the topic). -t Edit: I just remembered, "Eye for an Eye" is from Exodus 21, it was one of the laws that Moses received from his god following the ten commandments. Last edited by Tempest on Wed Jan 18, 2006 1:26 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Dan42
Chief Encyclopedist
 Posts: 3782 Location: Montreal |
|
|||||||||||||
|
My God, I can't believe how bloodthirsty all you people are! No matter if it's done by a government or a person, murder is murder is murder. It doesn't matter if the person is a "horrible criminal", because the government can pretty much change the definition of "horrible criminal" at will. Moreover, a government leads by example; if the government kills its citizens in the name of Justice, that sends the message that citizens can also kill in the name of Justice. By condoning the death penalty you are placing yourselves at the same level as the murderers you condemn. Justice? Justice is about reparation of damages. Killing a murderer will not bring anyone back to life, so this is just about revenge. What's the point? Does it really feel so good to kill people? At this point it's not about the murderer at all; it's about the people who want to kill him. So if someone is horrible enough it's ok to kill? It's better to just lock him up for life; it's cheaper, it's a longer punishment, and it doesn't degrade our dignity. Not to mention, it has the nice bonus that we can be sure we never kill an innocent person. There *have* been cases where a person was found innocent after 20+ years of jail, you know?
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
novem
 Posts: 28 |
|
|||||||||||||
I totally agree with this. Also, I'm against the death penalty because I don't believe it's right for any human to have control over the life of another. I found it disconcerting that people were accusing the person who voiced a similar opinion earlier of sympathizing with the criminal. I don't feel compassionate toward him; he's a disgusting human being in my eyes, but that doesn't make it right to murder him. The thing about suicide: he'd take his own life out of his own free will. That's his decision and fine with me. However, that all boils down to personal opinion. I do think that hanging is a bit harsh, and at least the chair or a lethal injection would've been more humane options. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Fiction Alchemist
Posts: 438 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
DELETED. Embarrassing...
Last edited by Fiction Alchemist on Thu Sep 08, 2022 7:49 am; edited 2 times in total |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
AchtungAffen
Posts: 26 Location: Sur, paredón y después |
|
|||||||||||||
|
@Sethimothy
Revenge, you mean? Not by law. Not a law sentimentally driven. If we start legislating on passions we never know where we'll end, right? If he decides by himself to take his own life in ways to atone for his crimes, the it's fine by me. It's his decision and not the law imposing.
Wow, it's great to meet you God. You must be the one, as only God has the rightful decision over life and death of people. No human is perfect enough as to take such a terminal and irreparable decision. @darkhunter
On my personal fora perhaps, but never on my country's legislation. My passions are my own only and should not impose decisions universally. @GATSU
Exactly. @Vekou
Hmm, the fight of good vs evil, tagging people as "subhumans". Wonder where I've heard all of this before... @pinoyfreestyler
Hmm, I believe it was a babilonian king and not Jesus who created the lex talionis. The Jesus thing was different:
Oops, 'thas been said on a post before. @Dan42 I'm in love. Never expected to see that here. I salute you. ---------------------------- That idea of capital punishment as an example is just flawed. Get the statistics, see if places with capital punishment actually helped lowering those kinds of crimes. Generally when you commit those kinds of crimes you don't think much about the consequences. Humans are rational and all, but are not that logical nor clockwork. It would work for Spock, but here on earth it's a whole different business. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Carl Horn
Posts: 90 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
Even if we regard the death penalty as barbaric, we also have to admit our feelings might change if it was someone close to us who had been the victim. But even without debating those issues, I oppose the death penalty for this reason: the courts, like any human institution, are not perfect, and as long as you maintain a death penalty, every once in a while, a person innocent of the crime will be executed. I can't morally justify accepting the occasional murder—which is what killing an innocent person is—in order to kill the majority condemned to death who are actually guilty.
In a way, I think the procedure of lethal injection is more horrible than hanging. Hanging at least faces squarely what the law is about to do: execute someone. Lethal injection is a way to pretend it's some kind of bloodless medical procedure, an anesthesia from which one never awakens. In terms of being cruel, it is arguably worse than hanging—strapped on a table for long minutes watching poison creep into your veins, versus your neck broken swiftly. Capital punishment, like murder, is a terrible thing, and it is quite possible lethal injection helps to keep it around, because people don't have to face up to its reality quite so much as you do with a noose. I credit Japan at least for not evading the issue. Dan42, it's good to see you here. As his avatar might suggest, he was one of the most important international promoters of JIN-ROH (an anime that also faces up to killing in the name of the law). This was particularly significant as the film premiered in France even before Japan. —C. "Melon smashin', huh?" —Osaka |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Abarenbo Shogun
 Posts: 1573 |
|
|||||||||||||
I dunno, the thought of using taxpayer money to "support" this guy when that money should be used for something else (Crime prevention, road projects, enhancing the education standards by buying manga and anime for school libraries  ) is painfully hard to swallow.
The less monies spent to get this guy to the gallows, the more it can be spent elsewhere. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Tempest
I Run this place. ANN Publisher Posts: 10421 Location: Do not message me for support. |
|
|||||||||||||
|
I think the big issue here, is, "Is this person capable of being fully responsible for his crimes?"
He was found to suffer from MPD, I believe that in the USA someone with MPD would not be put to death, but would instead be institutionalised. Two teams of psychiatrists studied him, one found that he was had a "mental disorder", the other found that he had a "personality disorder." The court accepted the finding that he had a personality disorder. Which meant that he was mentally capable of knowing, and understanding the wrongness, gravity and repercussions of his crimes. For me though, the simple fact that 1 out of 2 teams of psychiatrists found him to be mentally ill, would be more than enough to believe that he deserved to be treated as such. Kind of in tune with the "beyond a reasonable doubt" belief. The presence of differing psychiatric evaluations creates a reasonable doubt in his ability to understand the gravity of his actions. Which creates a reasonable doubt in his "guilt." The same way a 3-year-old child can never be guilty of murder. As for the death penalty... I'm not a big fan of it (and I find the chair to be absolutely inhumane, cruel and stupid), but I understand those that believe it to be an appropriate punishment for certain crimes. As a deterrent, the average person is scared of death, more than anything, knowing that they might be executed for their crimes is more effective than knowing they will be locked up. On an economical viewpoint, if a person is never going to be reformed, and will never be released, why bother spending all that time & money on incarcerating them. Of course, its rather questionable to look at someone's life (anyone's life) as a measurement of cost. But as a punishment, execution is quick and painless. Life in prison is more punishment than execution. The biggest argument against the death penalty is the belief that it is wrong to take a human life if there is any other option (or in some cases (Quakers) in any circumstances). This however is an ethical point of view that many people will feel differently on, and as has been exemplified in this thread, there is no clear majority opinion (although in Japan vast majority opinion in reportedly pro-death penalty). The next biggest argument against, as has been pointed out by Dan and Carl, is that the courts are not infallible. In this case, the case is pretty clear cut, the person in question committed these crimes, but his ability to be responsible is not clear. The courts decided he was capable, but experts were divided in opinion. In other cases, many people have been sentenced to crimes that they did not commit. Giving them life in prison leaves them the chance to be exonerated should new evidence turn up. Of course, they can be exonerated even if dead, but little good it does them, as they can't be "freed." In the end, I'm a bit of a fence sitter on the issue. I don't hold a stead fast belief that the death penalty is morally wrong, but I do see it as questionable on two practical points. Is it really a punishment (what's more important punishment or deterrent) and more importantly, the fallibility of the courts. -t |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Kazuki-san
 Posts: 2251 Location: Houston, TX |
|
|||||||||||||
If murder is murder is murder, then what is killing in the midst of war? It is killing sanctioned by the government, carried out by those mobilized in an official agency of said government, among citizens of some country, in the past often their own. They are fought for a variety of reasons, but, throughout history, for reasons that often are not nearly as compelling as 'revenge.' After WWII, did we let a generation of murderers return home to live free? That's not meant as an attack, or even as much of a rebuttal. But it does go to show that not everything is black and white. What is acceptable often changes depending on the context.
As for my viewpoint on capital punishment, I honestly have not been able to form a full opinion that I can solidly stand on in every case I have read about. It's often not a simple matter of yes/no, but yes in what cases, no in what other cases, is it possible to squeeze by into no when the person should be eligible and vice versa. But, execution, depending on the method, can be quite painful. It can also take a long time to die, although, comparative to a lifetime, quick. There are however, people who can spend a lifetime in prison, and live a quite fulfilling (to them) life. They can also cause more trouble, hurt and/or kill others. I've met people, not that have killed others, but who are in jail for one reason or another, who are quite happy with their lives there. I've also heard stories from my jailer friend of how some of these people have more power over people (in terms of being the 'boss' of a section of the jail, or rising to the boss of a prison gang, which can involve actually manipulating and ordering activities on the streets) then they ever had when they were free. So it's never a cut and dry question, and has more to do with if a person feels remorse for their actions then anything. Last edited by Kazuki-san on Wed Jan 18, 2006 6:27 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group