Viewing Thread:
"Tim McVeigh"

On Monday the Oklahoma bomber, Tim McVeigh, was executed for the murder of 180 people. A huge number of moral and ethical issues are raised in this punishment. So, the question is, should he have been killed?

Well I personally think that, no, he should not have been killed. Let me explain my point of view. I happen to believe that no one; NO ONE deserves to die. No matter what they’ve done and how they have acted it is just not right to take away a persons life like that. Decreeing who lives or dies is like playing God. Ask any morally correct human or any Holy person and they will give you this answer. Playing God is wrong. And we are effectively doing this.

Another point would be the fact that he actually WANTED to die. By executing him they’ve granted his wishes which is basically wrong. Isn’t it? This guy killed 180 people in one swoop. So why the Hell are they granting him his wish? Killing him is the easy way out for him. He’s escaped the public’s wrath (mostly) and can now rot peacefully in Hell.

Death for Timothy McVeigh is not much of a punishment. He had a quick and painless death. All he would have felt was a p***k where the needle went in. He received three drugs. One to put him unconscious, one to collapse his lungs and finally one to stop his heart. It was all over in a split second for him. More of a punishment for him would have been to actually meet and look the relatives of the people he killed in the eye and say he was sorry, would have been much harder. Much more punishing. Much more PAINFUL for him to do this than to have been put to death.

So why else shouldn’t have he been killed? Well there’s the fact that, no matter what court sanctions it, no matter if it’s inside the law or outside, execution is still MURDER. Killing someone because a court has sanctioned it is no different from killing someone because they killed your brother or something like that. They’re lowering themselves to his level by executing him.

What has been gained by this? By killing him I mean. What the hell has it solved? It doesn’t bring back the people who were killed. It doesn’t help anyone... apart from journalists. It may help ease the pain felt by the families of the ones who were killed (although it shouldn’t) But most critically of all: There is still some blind spots in the case of the Oklahoma bomb. By killing the only known participant then we’re still going to not know some, perhaps, critical pieces of information.

Killing Tim McVeigh was both stupid and irresponsible, it should not have been done. I feel very strongly about this and that is why I have gone to the trouble of writing this piece.

RBS

Capital punishment is a very delicate subject and much debated like many other things in the world but i don't really think this argument will come to end. Different people have different views about life and what actions to take in different situations. Many people in this forum have said what they believe and have given their reason for the beliefs about what should have happened to Tim McVeigh. I think it is a good thing that this subject and other subjects are being discussed as it lets us see what other people feel and think about certain situations. All the points made here are valid ones and i'm glad that nobody has posted any stupid comments or has gone off on a "i'm right and your wrong" speech.
Personally i think there is a strong case for both sides of the argument.

Why should somebody who doesn't care about life and has proven this by killing 168 innocent people be allowed to live while he has not only killed these people and caused thousands of dollars of damage to a federal building but has ruined the lives of everybody who was related or were close friends to the victims? He killed children while they were in a day care centre. He knew what he was doing and he showed no remorse for what he had done.

But isn't it more of a punishment to let somebody rot in jail and be know as cold-blooded killer who knowingly killed men, women and children, by everybody. Capital Punishment doesn't set an example because people are still committing violent crimes against each other.

In a few months this will more than likely be forgotten like many other serial killers have been forgotton for what they have done and how they have effected other people's lives. I think it's a real s***ty world were people will knowingly kill each other for only minor gains in their own life. Where people kill out of revenge and hatred of each other and for something as stupid as the colour of their skin, their religious beliefs or for the simply fact that they just don't like the other person or want money.

I know i've properly gone a bit o.t.t. in that last paragraph but it is something that really gets to me.
Thank you for reading this and the other comments posted in this topic.

Darkreaper

I'd have to agree. Capital punishment is not a punishment. A life prison sentence would have been far worse punishment for what he did and would enable us to fill in those gaps.

Captial punishment is not a punishment. He didn't even feel pain in the action of the injection! Sure he deserved to be punished but a prison sentence goes on and on and on and people would hate it. Think of the Moors Murderer. He said he wanted to die but they wouldn't let him. If we wants to die so much this shows how punishing his sentence is.

And remember murders bad. HE murders people so they murder him. Two wrongs don't make a right.

I'm with you on this capital punishment sucks - thank god we live in England.

No matter what anyone says, Mcveigh deserved to die. He sealed his own fate when he planted the bomb and killed 168 people. It's alright saying that he should be thrown in jail for life but do you really think that it is fair on the families on the victims?

He killed 168 people, thats 168 lifes lost and you think he doesnt deserve to die? The only thing that should have been done if he hadnt of been killed was to torture him for the rest of his days.

Sorry if this seems a bit harsh but its what I believe.

Life to him does not seem to be very important, if it was would he have killed all those people? So is taking his life really significant? Surely locking him up would be the way to go. But i suppose its what you believe in. Maybe you believe that you get punished in the afterlife for your sins. If this is true then this guy is gonna get punished big-time.

If he had not been executed - should he have simply been put in prison until he died, do you not think that would have been worse? Worse than being killed for sure.

I don't agree that people should be killed either, obviously, and in this highly debatable issue in which my view is undoubtedly going to become lost amongst my waffling, I want to point out that what this man has done, in his life is unthinkable and just evil.

I don't believe that by killing another human being because he murdered many, is not the way to go about it. Life imprisonment would be a far, far more fair way for him to end his life, by killing him, without pain as such, is letting him off lightly.

I'm going to leave this now.

Thanks

Dan2K1

Who suggested medical research instead of execution?
I wonder if the public would be any more willing to see bad people ripped apart and experimented upon, but still kept alive, as an alternative to the chair.

He doesn't die, so it's not immoral right?

True, True!!

Killing people is bad. Okay.

Whether it's dropping a bomb on a town during war or stabbing someone in the street.

But that's life. It happens.

Now now, let's not start with that.

McVeigh admitted he did it, end of story.

Yes it was bad.
Nobody is disagreeing.

I'm sure all of the innocent victims killed by the US in vietnam would be glad to hear your view Meka!!