US firefighters shot dead at blaze in Webster, New York

[The Duchess of Zeon]

And yet for the militia to serve its purpose of defending the United States against enemies both foreign and domestic, it must have a reserve of arms capable of engaging the regular army in at least a protracted guerrilla struggle with some chance of rendering the subjugation of the country impossible, which doesn't imply disarmament but rather that we should be issuing Class III's for more 90mm anti-tank rifles.

[Kamakazie Sith]

And another nail in the pro-gun lobby's coffin...

More like an in your face reason why people who illegally take a life should never be paroled.

Are you liking your objection to rehabilitation?

For killers? Yes.

[Broomstick]

The argument there would be, again, "this person should not have access to guns" being a convicted felon.

Pardon my ignorance but why did this convicted felon get access to a gun (assuming he secured one legally)?

The largest flaw in your statement is the assumption that he obtained one legally. There is no legal way for a convicted killer to own a firearm.

Further restricting legal ownership is not going to impact someone like this who can't legally own one in the first place. Criminals don't obey the law, it's what makes them criminals. The problem here, as in Newtown, is that people who shouldn't have guns managed to get them. Presumably, this is a matter of inadequate security on the part of legal gun owners.

So... yes, the question IS "how did this convicted felon get access to a gun" but the answer is as likely to involve theft as selling.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

As a matter of fact the police were investigating a string of firearms thefts in the town where this attack took place in the last several weeks. Some police sources are now saying there is a connection.

[Vendetta]

And another nail in the pro-gun lobby's coffin...

Keep talking, nimwit. I'm sure that people that think like you would agree. While the 50 or so million gun owners that didn't hurt anyone will continue to disagree.

The thing is, the very large legal market for firearms is what allows the illegal market to thrive as well. Becuase all the illegally acquired firearms have to be stolen or purchased from a legal owner at some point.

If there weren't 50 or so million gun owners not hurting anyone (except by poorly securing a lethal weapon), there would be vastly less firearms for criminals to illegally acquire.

[Aaron MkII]

So I take it we're just going to rehash gun control through three separate threads?

[Alyeska]

Enough with the gun control talk people. Start a dedicated thread about the issue if you are so inclined.

[Grumman]

Are you liking your objection to rehabilitation?

He wasn't rehabilitated - you can tell by the whole "ambush and murder the fire department" thing. And frankly, if you're willing to beat a ninety year old woman to death with a hammer, I don't see any reason to believe you ever will be.

[Broomstick]

Well, you never know - the man's grandmother might have been a sadistic bitch. Not that it would excuse killing her, of course, but sometimes a person kills one person due to a particular reason (justifiable or not) and so long as no one else acts as a trigger they won't kill again. This shows up with abusive relationships sometimes, with a kid finally hitting back at an elder after years of abuse. Such people may well never kill again.

Of course, this guy wasn't one such what with trapping and executing firemen but not all murderers are irredeemable.

[JLTucker]

Are you liking your objection to rehabilitation?

For killers? Yes.

I wonder if your Blue Wall Buddies buy you drinks to congratulate you on your outstanding moral fiber.

Is there a particular reason why you feel we shouldn't attempt to rehabilitate murderers? Is there a reason you want to indefinitely confine all murderers (even depending on the manner of their crime) to the tortuous experience that is the American penal system without any hopes of getting out?

Thanks for your future response.

[Simon_Jester]

I wonder if he might use the word "killer" in a colloquial, informal sense, to refer not just to people who have killed, but who have the 'killing disposition,' a personality (or mental illness) that makes them more likely to kill.

Rehabilitating someone like that could be a lot harder, to the point where it could stop being worth the risk because of the number of them who revert to type when you let them out.

Do you think such a case might exist, Tucker? Or is it so improbable that we shouldn't let it affect policy?

[Kamakazie Sith]

Are you liking your objection to rehabilitation?

For killers? Yes.

I wonder if your Blue Wall Buddies buy you drinks to congratulate you on your outstanding moral fiber.

Some would others would not and that's because we are composed of people and not your stereotype you have in your brain. Sterostyping a large group of people is behavior you should be ashamed of as it appears to be inconsistent with the rest of your values.

Is there a particular reason why you feel we shouldn't attempt to rehabilitate murderers? Is there a reason you want to indefinitely confine all murderers (even depending on the manner of their crime) to the tortuous experience that is the American penal system without any hopes of getting out?

Unlike property a life can't be replaced. Until rehabilitation in this country is improved then people who take a life should stay behind bars for public safety. Now that doesn't make the state of US prison system acceptable by any means but that's a different discussion.

Thanks for your future response.

Haha you aren't actually interested in real discussion are you?

[JLTucker]

Unlike property a life can't be replaced. Until rehabilitation in this country is improved then people who take a life should stay behind bars for public safety. Now that doesn't make the state of US prison system acceptable by any means but that's a different discussion.

You implied that any rehabilitation for a murderer should never happen. So, which is it? Imprison them for life or wait until the US gets its shit together to opt for better rehabilitation? How can we shoot for rehabilitation if people like you object to it until it gets better? That would be like objecting to gay rights until more laws are passed to give gays full rights equivalent to others. This is not a direct comparison, of course, but just a way to point out what I perceive to be a flaw in your cynicism. I imagine that if our main goal in the penal system was to rehabilitate, we'd be in a different spot today.

[Grumman]

You implied that any rehabilitation for a murderer should never happen.

No, he's implying that rehabilitation for a murder can never happen, or not reliably enough for a so-called "rehabilitated" murderer to be let free. Like Broomstick I don't think this is the case for people who commit murder in the face of extraordinary provocation but for your average murderer without those extenuating circumstances, I agree.

How can we shoot for rehabilitation if people like you object to it until it gets better? That would be like objecting to gay rights until more laws are passed to give gays full rights equivalent to others. This is not a direct comparison, of course, but just a way to point out what I perceive to be a flaw in your cynicism.

I think your objection is without merit. We have already decided as a society that once you're convicted of a serious crime, your right to freedom is secondary to everyone else's right not to be murdered. The burden shifts from the side trying to justify restricting the individual's rights to the side trying to justify lifting this restriction - it's why you have a thirty year sentence with the possibility of parole after fifteen rather than a fifteen year sentence with the possibility of tacking on another fifteen.

[Gandalf]

Is there a particular reason why you feel we shouldn't attempt to rehabilitate murderers? Is there a reason you want to indefinitely confine all murderers (even depending on the manner of their crime) to the tortuous experience that is the American penal system without any hopes of getting out?

Unlike property a life can't be replaced. Until rehabilitation in this country is improved then people who take a life should stay behind bars for public safety. Now that doesn't make the state of US prison system acceptable by any means but that's a different discussion.

Does this apply to people who clearly intend to take a life, but just happen to not kill their target? I would argue that they're just as dangerous, but perhaps less accurate.

[Kamakazie Sith]

You implied that any rehabilitation for a murderer should never happen. So, which is it? Imprison them for life or wait until the US gets its shit together to opt for better rehabilitation? How can we shoot for rehabilitation if people like you object to it until it gets better? That would be like objecting to gay rights until more laws are passed to give gays full rights equivalent to others. This is not a direct comparison, of course, but just a way to point out what I perceive to be a flaw in your cynicism. I imagine that if our main goal in the penal system was to rehabilitate, we'd be in a different spot today.

If the rehabilitation system did not have incidents such as this one then I'd be willing to consider rehabilitation for murders. It would depend on a case by case scenario but I'd probably only accept a perfect system when considering murderers without extraordinary provocation but until that happens then they do need to be imprisoned for life. This decision is about personal accountability, justice, and public safety.

What is your decision about? It sounds like you just feel bad for them.

The other side of the coin is I no longer accept the death penalty. I did once a long time ago due to ignorance. My reason for not accepting it is due to the problems with the system. It isn't because I feel that the execution of certain criminals is morally wrong but that because the system is seriously flawed then it has no business making permanent choices like execution. (Though I do have exception for the mass shooters who are captured in the act)

[Kamakazie Sith]

Is there a particular reason why you feel we shouldn't attempt to rehabilitate murderers? Is there a reason you want to indefinitely confine all murderers (even depending on the manner of their crime) to the tortuous experience that is the American penal system without any hopes of getting out?

Unlike property a life can't be replaced. Until rehabilitation in this country is improved then people who take a life should stay behind bars for public safety. Now that doesn't make the state of US prison system acceptable by any means but that's a different discussion.

Does this apply to people who clearly intend to take a life, but just happen to not kill their target? I would argue that they're just as dangerous, but perhaps less accurate.

Absolutely. In fact, I'd say that's major win for public safety.