Teacher shot...

Dead penalty comes to my mind.......

Assuming its a clear-cut case; no ambiguity about the identity of the killer; was premeditated; not in self defence; not the result of serious provocation by the teacher;

Cheers

Don

Don, the kid had a gun at school. A) That's illegal for starters and b) he/she shot the teacher. Both are inexcusable and none defensible.

My SO is a teacher and I'm grateful she comes home in one piece every night. Violence against teaching staff cannot be tolerated in any shape or form.

Steve

Quote: 'Violence against teaching staff cannot be tolerated in any shape or form.'


Agreed - but does the death penalty accomplish any reasonable goals?

The teacher and his/her family have my deepest sympathy, but this is a discussion ofthe death penalty.

My understanding is that the Talmudic requirement for actually imposing the death penalty for the many crimes listed in the Bible as capital offenses is: 2 witnesses must see the murder and remonstrate with the killer before s/he killed.

Without those requirements being met, the death penalty is not to be imposed.

At least in the US, there's too much evidence that the death penalty is imposed due to politics, and too often imposed after illegal and unethical behavior by police and/or prosecutors.

People being what they are, I don't believe police and prosecutors behave any better in other countries.

Acting with judicial violently in response to personal violence says that viloence, after all, is all there is.

Do you believe in God? Let Him/Her make life and death decisions. For us, our best hope is to see there are consequences and to do our best to build a culture which deters violence in the future.

Phil

Phil,

He was shot in front of the whole class to see, so more than 2 witnesses. My remark about the death penalty was emotionally driven.

Rob.

This is a bit like telling the next of kin from a fatal road collision where the offending driver was driving dangerously (so therefore can only get 10 years in prison max) that its 'so sad', but thats the max the offender is going to get.

Beacause a f/arms is involved the offender will get ages in jail anyway, and because he/she killed someone probably life (for murder in this country - may get less if defences are allowed and it got dropped to manslaughter...)

I suppose the questions are 'who are we to judge?' & 'should we spend our tax payers money on keeping em inside?'. This was batted around on another thread recently as well, wasn't it? (Ray Davies shot...)(oh and not knocking this type of debate at all 'cos is good to understand differing points of view )

But infront of a class full of kids/teenagers etc... thats real bad...

I'll get me coat...

I'd just like to add that I'm not 'pro death penalty' but pro maximum jail sentence.

As an aside, I think more has to done about the physical attacks that some teachers/support staff suffer. In all too many instances, the student is excluded from school but is not formally charged. Assault is assault and should be dealt with as such regardless of the student’s age.

Steve

I left school 30 years ago, but there's still one Latin master I'd like to shoot.

If this young man as murdered for no apparent reason then in my opinion he should be imprisoned until his 65th birthday.

It will be tough on him but safer for the rest of us.

Regards

Mick

Mick,
no one kills for "no apparent reason" they all have a reason however obscure to the rest of society. It would have been a pleasant change to your usual postings if you had waited untill all of the facts were available or more to the point the trial verdict before condemning them to prison untill their 65th. birthday. One should be asking, I would respectively suggest,where a school child can get hold of a fire arm in a civilised society and what we all can do to stop the availablity
of them. Beating people with a stick to prove violence is wrong in my opinion just dosn't work and only perpetrates even more violence.Look at the prision records for reoffending prisioners to see the proof of this,locking people up and then throwing away the key isn't the answer and does not make this a safer place however much you would like to beleive it.
The big unanswered question both in America, Holland, here and many other civilised countrys is whyand what can be done to stop this culture of violence that we feed to our youngsters
oldie.

Quote...",locking people up and then throwing away the key isn't the answer and does not make this a safer place however much you would like to beleive it."

Oldie

If he is inside for the next 48 years, then the schools and streets will be safer.

Regards

Mick

Steve,

FWIW, my wife is a teacher.

As I said in my 1st post above, providing its a clear-cut case and there are no ambiguities, the death penalty would be appropriate.

Cheers

Don

Evanston Phil, How's it going?
You hit some good nails on the head there I think with your comments. We all come from different countries, backgrounds, etc, etc, but one thing amongst us all remains constant in that we all must one day die. Many countries over the years I think have abolished the death penalty because of its uncertainty when later evidence is produced (no-matter how horrendous the crime(s))and the State must cope with the emotional consequences of killing innocent folk.
In emergency situations and in war the rules change overnight as we have all seen, but they must return to normal ASAP, and that sometimes requires people kicking their own leaders butts as it were, whoever they may be.

Cheers, Fritz Von Kidsdon'tmakeguns

Ps: This guy should be tried under the full force of Dutch Law and sentenced avccordingly, Justice is never truly served when mixed with emotion.

Mick,
unfortunatly you have failed to answer the question whyuntil we know that! our streets will never be as safe as you would wish, there will always,like London Buses, be another following behind.The answer in the long term is in our hands ,we need to find out why the young and to a lesser extent, our selves need a diet of violence on a daily basis WHY do they think that it's hip to carry
fire arms as a form of jewellery .The fault lies with our inability to understand how we have promoted the culture of power, on TV, Films and advertising, "to be powerful is to be successful" is the message that we constantly put forward. Arms are made and promoted for profit,this is where we need to start if we are ever to get a grip on this
increasing problem of violence in our society
and locking one kid up for the rest of his or her life will do nothing to solve this endemic
problem we have.
Don.
I taught for 8 years at a college of art in the midlands before coming to Brighton and spent a further 17 years at the Uni. so I have had some experience of dealing with young people and their,and if I may say so, our problems. But In my opinion as I have stated before I don't think the answer is to lock people up and throw away the key, far better to try to find out and understand the route cause of the problem, and then, and it's only ,and then, we may start to understand the problems we are facing, then we may be able find away of dealing with them. Again wether we like it or not Fritz has shown a far greater understanding of the problems than the lock u'm up and chuck the key away brigade
oldie.
oldie.

Oldie,

I respect your views, and those of others.

We should put resources into finding out what drives people (young and old) to kill, and commit crime in general.

Then we should try to re-educate them, or accomodate their problem, by changing society to avoid the problem in the first place, whilst avoiding introducing different, but equally disasterous problems.

This is what we do when bringing up our own children. It does take time.

Meanwhile, (IMO - obviously), we have to make it clear what is acceptable and what is not. This sometimes has to be reinforced with punishment and reward. Its not ideal, its not perfect, it is a compromise.

Cheers

Don

"should we spend our tax payers money on keeping em inside?"

Actually this is something a myth as the endless appeals and years and years of legal fees makes it more expensive than keeping soneone in jail for the rest of their lives.

I suppose there is probably a cut-off point where the offender is so young that on average society would break even if we went for the death penalty. So if in this case the offender is in still in the infants hanging might be the best option.

If they are in secondary school then I suppose there might be some sort of compromise where we give them life but leave lots of packets of Rothmans in their cell hoping they'll succumb to temptatation and consequently meet an early death.

Matthew

Don,
it's most reassuring that some of us are not only paddling in the same canoe but also in general going in the same direction, our only difference seems to be on the severity
of the punishment,and I for one, would like to see taken into account our failings as a society,we can't totally blame those who take on board our preachings regarding power and success and then condemn them when they misinterpret our signals.
Matthew,
I must say that I'm not sure that I understand your logic, are you really suggesting that an infant that copies what they see on TV, Films etc. should be imprisoned
for life, rather than us trying to find out where we, as a society have gone wrong. I can only hope that you are useing irony that I in my dim witted state have failed to grasp if this is so, please accept my apologies, if not
my condolences.
oldie.

Based on a previous discussion on this forum, I would like to add a thought.

If the teacher or another teacher had fired at the armed child and wounded him, that teacher would have been held liable and risked jail. Gun control laws are clearly not prventing firearms in the hands of the wrong people. Worse however is the fact that had someone been in a position to respond, the discussion here would not be about how many years the little bastard would be in jail; but rather how much time the teacher would receive for shooting him to defend others. Ironic.

Clearly the problem with this kid is that he is a minor and may not risk being charged as an adult. Perhaps they should throw his useless parents in jail as well.

tw

Tristram,
now theres a thought gun toting teachers,what a wonderful way of maintaining class discipline.Although I do in away agree with your other statement that maybe we should lock away his useless parents as well. But could I add to that, those who supply fire arms, the politicians that condone there sale, the tv and film companys that feed us with continual gratuitous violence,the shops that sell replica fire arms that can be easly converted
to fire bullets of a sort, again the politicians who know this is being done but fail to put a stop to it in case they upset
commercial interests,all of us because we have failed to recognise we have allowed a problem to get out of hand. The list is endless.Surly the most sensible and productive answer, would be to try to find out why these people go off the rails, and then we as a society could try to do something about putting things right before we see more of the likes of this and other tragic outcomes.Getting rid of guns that are available to the general public would be a small but worthwhile start.Just my thoughts on this you understand.
oldie

Oldie/Fritz - here here!

'Kidsdon'tmakeguns' - very poignant I feel....

Oldie,
I have been brought up on a diet rich in gratuitous violence in films and on TV and in the music I listen to; I haven't killed anyone, and don't think I ever will. I accept of course though that they can be highly influential to children.
Of far more relevance to actually doing something about violent crime, and making society a better place is:
1) Firearms control
2) Addressing poverty
3) Addressing balance between work life and home life so that parents can spend time with children
4) Projects that promote community pride
5) Joined up thinking between police / prison service / social services / other care services
6) Consistent sentencing

Simon

"no one kills for "no apparent reason" they all have a reason however obscure to the rest of society. It would have been a pleasant change to your usual postings if you had waited untill all of the facts were available or more to the point the trial verdict before condemning them to prison untill their 65th."

.....And maybe we are lacking the ability to understand the circumstances that made Mick like he is. Rather than just putting down his opinion, maybe we could be discussing the background to him having these views. We mustn't be concerned with the psychology of the criminal and not others who are entitled to their views too.

Simon,
I wouldn't disagree with a single comment you have made,but there does seem to be some divide between people,some can control their violent feelings and channel them into a more useful activity, others do not seem to have this ability and their emotions just explode
uncontrollably generally with dire results.I too have violent emotions towards some members of this forum, but thats all they are I wouldn't dream of causing them personal injury
[ oh well!!, perhaps I might ]We need to understand
why there is this differance before we can attend to it
May be Mekon can explain the Big WHY

Rasher
e'hm, I couldn't possibly comment on your posting,
oldie.

I think, in short, the answer is that we're all different. Different people are angered by different things, but it's the extent to which we're angered is of concern. I guess it's a nature/nurture thing. I personally feel that it's a dangerous thing to think that because something doesn't affect us it won't affect others. We all have varying upbringingings, some sad, some not so sad. I personally find arrogance very concerning, and I speak as someone who has experienced a MAJOR mental illness (psychosis) a few years back and has tried to correct the things that caused it - it's a long road back I can tell you, and I can also tell you that other people may have turned what I experienced into severe outward violence - I did the opposite, turned it against myself. I know this is personal to me, but I am just trying to point out we all experience things differently, and to be careful how we judge things.....

Fisbey,
I take your point absolutely. I guess I was starting to say, but never really got it out, that we can't make films, music, TV on an assumption of worst case scenario of how it might affect someone. Otherwise we will all be sitting around watching Shrek 24-7. So I was trying to produce a list of things that we could do positively to address violence in society.
Regards
Simon

Oldie.

I was not advocating guns for teachers. I was however making an observation about current law in the UK and I might add here in Canada. It is that the perpetraitor becomes the victim if he is subjected to his own brand of "justice".

Again, gun control continues to prove both unsuccessful and in some cases detrimental. The government here in Canada, has spent in excess of a billion Canadian dollars to hamper law biding citizens with regulation, draconian laws, tyrannical bureaucrats, and unnecessary expenses. The result? At least a shooting a week in the Toronto area by young people, probably not unlike the clown described here.

There is only one way for society to deal with this problem. It's not "understanding". It's called responsibility and repercussions. If a man thinks he might get shot when he goes to rob or assault someone, he's less likely to bother trying. While this doesn't have a basis for a school environment; the negative consequences of using a firearm, (either getting shot, killed, or actually going to prison) might actually work.

The guys that use guns to kill or assault other people should not be allowed the excuse of poverty or be offered the victim status through "understanding". These people need a the very least a good kick in the ass. If they touched the stove and burned their hand it isn't likely that they would try it again. The more these guys are offered reward for their criminal activities, the less safe all of us are.

tw