Compassion

They just have to be fuckin’ jokin’ me.

timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u … 802746.ece

Compassion.

What…you’re going to keep him in prison until he dies, unless he dies…that is fucking stupid.

  • my brother

What’s so stupid about it? It’s reportedly only a few weeks. How much could that cost?

compassion for terrorists is an interesting thought…

now is this guy a confessed terrorist?

What did he do?

Not that i mean any disrespect, but my media has said nothing about this bloke.

Yea, we tend to let our own governments do the manipulating, that way we don’t have to compare beliefs.

Why keep him in -
Rehabilitation? He’s either rehabilitated or not by now.
Public protection? I can’t imagine he’ll do much from his deathbed.
Specific deterrence? I can’t imagine he’ll do much from his deathbed.
General deterrence? I can’t imagine it’ll prompt anyone to think “ah, prison’s not so bad, they’ll let me out if I’m dying of cancer, may as well commit that crime”.

That leaves vengeance in punishing, versus compassion in releasing, a dying man. Of course, we should aim to be a compassionate society.
Or looking from the other perspective, the societal catharsis of punishing a man for his deeds even as he dies, versus the collective cognitive dissonance of releasing a man who has caused many others pain. Of course, we should aim to be a healthy society.
What’s a boy to think?

I’m thinking that if you commit an act such as he did, then a slow and painful death is appropriate. Compassion for its own sake is a waste of emotion.

Vengeance for its own sake is not?

I’m not sure what other sakes there are for compassion.

Hi to All,

Question: Who is he?
Question: Who are we?

Personally, I think he should rot in Hell, lose a few fingernails and a knee cap or two. But then there are times when I am not comfortable with whom I am.

Thanks Ed

Only_Humean - criminal justice systems codify and formalise vengeance. To keep the peace, and to help governments maintain control over the populace. That’s what criminal justice systems do - it’s what they have always done. It’s all about vengeance. But not for its own sake - it’s for just that social control.

Society is not improved by releasing this guy.

If it’s that simple, then compassion is not for its own sake, either, it’s a force for reduced governmental control; a recognition of the humans caught in the machine.

I’m not wholly in favour of his release, by the way, I think the catharsis serves a useful function; and the perception of justice by “the masses”, especially given his Muslim background, will not benefit. I do think that compassion is an empty gesture from people who only apply it to approved subjects, though. If it’s not an egalitarian recognition of shared humanity it’s simply favouritism, doggy treats for those who please you.

And this murderer is human, just like you and me and his victims are and were. I wonder how much of the emotion involved is a condemnation of his betrayal of that, how much is anger at his failure to see the humanity in his victims, and how much is fear of what that says about our own capacities.

Humans caught in the machine? You mean that this guy is a victim of society? Society gave him a fatal disease?

I’m not following.

Sure - compassion can be instrumental to another end - I just don’t think this is a good example of that. I think it’s misplaced. I see no purpose to this act of compassion. I don’t see who it helps, except the perp. Why should he be helped? What does the Scottish government owe him, and how are Scots benefiting?

We owe him the same as we owe every human being.

We are benefitting by having a free place in Greenock jail to house another Methadone, Dole Queuing, Ned.

What do we owe every human being? That’s the kind of statement that need a whole heap o’ justifying. No matter - you’ve started another thread.

Never thought of that. Perhaps you should free every murderer.

My brother says he doesn’t understand your post, that he can’t make “heads or tails” of it.

He further says that it still makes no sense to him that they would let someone out of jail because they were dying, especially when he had a life sentence to begin with.

I seem to recall reading somewhere that there’s a considerable number of people in the UK who believed he was innocent of the bombing. I don’t know if that had some influence on this decision to release him, but it’s very different from how he’s viewed in the US. I don’t know how many of the victims were American but that may also have something to do with the difference of opinion expressed by the US and UK goverments.

Nihilistic -

Please relay my deepest compassion for his state of confusion. He is hereby released from any further reading of my posts.

Ingenium -

Hmmm. I don’t know how it’s viewed in the US. I just happened to stumble upon this story on Google News. I also don’t remember if any of the vics were from the US - presumably some were.

If doubts about his guilt are prevalent in the UK, then I can see some utility in his release.

I just didn’t know that, either.

Thanks, Ing. Perhaps I’ll sleep tonight, after all.

:mrgreen:

I told him the reply was “well if you can’t understand it, then you should probably just get it over with and eat a pile of shit”.

He giggled.

All’s well that ends well.

that’s what the bound bucket said

-Imp

Certainly there were mitigating circumstances regarding his conviction. The main witness was paid $2.7 million by the CIA, the identity parade was flawed, and a lot of evidence was circumstancial. However the court did convict him, so by the law of the land he was guilty. But yes most of the families of the victims in Lockerbie were of the opinion he was innocent. The spokesman Dr Swire advocates an appeal to put the matter to bed.

But yeah the majority of the victims were American. Perhaps because of the differences in Scottish and American law, the American view has been harsher. Had the bomb exploded over US soil, no doubt the man would have been sent to the chair by now.