Death sentence for forest fire arsonist

If this guy was a nacroleptic and fell asleep while holding a lit match then he would also be punished with a death sentence (this is a strech even by my standards) but i believe you cannot put people to death who suffer from a mental condition....

Do we execute smokers who fall asleep resulting in a fire that kills someone?

Originally posted by operation mindcrime
Soooooo.....what ever happened to arsonist being a mental condition as much as kleptomania and narcolepsia......

If this guy was a nacroleptic and fell asleep while holding a lit match then he would also be punished with a death sentence (this is a strech even by my standards) but i believe you cannot put people to death who suffer from a mental condition....

Or killers suffering from a personality disorder? Do not compare an ACCIDENT to an intentional act that is KNOW to cause a massive loss of life and property damage.

If you can't see the difference between an ACCIDENT and an INTENTIONAL act then there is no point in trying to explain it to you.

Originally posted by Make Speed Limit 45

Do we execute smokers who fall asleep resulting in a fire that kills someone?

Isnt that in line with your drunk driving opinion? You seemed to imply that current drunk driving penalties were insufficient. Drinking irresponsibly/smoking irresponsibly. What's the difference?

Say a smoker drops a cigarette in his lap while driving and the resulting swerve or whatever ends in a death.



[edit on 9-6-2009 by thisguyrighthere]

they should chain him around a dead and dry tree and light the tree on fire.
then see if he can tear his arms off trying to get away from the burning tree.


Ex Firefighter/EMT

Originally posted by Sonya610
Or killers suffering from a personality disorder? Do not compare an ACCIDENT to an intentional act that is KNOW to cause a massive loss of life and property damage.

If you can't see the difference between an ACCIDENT and an INTENTIONAL act then there is no point in trying to explain it to you.

Dear Sonya,

There is no need to explain anything to me about the difference between accident or an intentional act.........

What i am saying is that somebody with the compulsion to set things ablaze is not somebody you kill when they do.

Do you know enough about pyromania and have you handled people who suffer from this condition?? First lets look at what pyromania is :

From Wrong diagnosis

Pyromania:
Pyromania: Compulsive arson and fire starting behavior disorder.
Pyromania: an uncontrollable desire to set fire to things.

So it is compulsive and it is a disorder......

Now i know what you mean when you say that this was an intentional act but are we still talking about intentional when you suffer from a disorder that gives you the uncontrollable desire/compulsion to do something that you know is wrong.

Don't get me wrong, somebody with such a condition should be locked away from society and be prevented from carrying out his uncontrollable urges but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try and help this individual and try and solve this problem permanently because new ones will come!!!

Research has noted low levels of serotonin metabolites in the cerebrospinal fluid of “impulsive arsonists” and the fact that repeat arsonists also have lower levels of these metabolites than non-recidivists . This suggests that serotonin reuptake inhbitors (Prozac-like medications) may be effective in the treatment of pyromania but systematic studies of treatments have rarely been carried out (most reports are of single cases) to provide a definitive anwer.

So we could do something to help people with this condition but......

we could also kill 'm and solve the problem like that.

Which one do you think we (as an advanced civilisation) should choose??

Peace

[edit on 9/6/2009 by operation mindcrime]

reply to post by operation mindcrime


Would your attitude also apply to serial rapists and serial killers? They too have a mental "compulsion" to commit those acts. They think about it in advance, plan when and where to do it, and then committ the act.

Like arsonists, they are likely to do it again and again.

I do not see the difference, both acts are intentional and the perpetrator KNOWS they will cause serious trauma at the very least. Your argument is the pyromanic just really needs to do it because he enjoys it? And that makes it not so bad? Huh?? They (rapists, serial killers, pyromaniacs) all CHOOSE to do it whether or not they have "a mental compulsion".

Perhaps you are just anti-death penalty, which is fine, but if that is it SAY IT. Or do you believe killers and child rapists should be treated with kid gloves too because "it is out of their control do to the feeling of compulsion"?

reply to post by Sonya610


Then i still believe that killing a man in order to get satisfaction for the crime that has been commited is wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What ,in the name of all that is good, has their ever come from killing a man???

Lock 'm up for life, i don't care!! But don't think for one seconds that barbaric rituals such as the death penalty are gonna solve anything.

[sarcasm]
Unless it will make you sleep better at night!! Then i say fry the bastard!!!
[/sarcasm]

Peace

Isnt that in line with your drunk driving opinion? You seemed to imply that current drunk driving penalties were insufficient. Drinking irresponsibly/smoking irresponsibly. What's the difference?

Yes, they are the same thing and i think smokers who fall asleep and burn down a house and kill someone should be prosecuted. But they seldom are and they certainly don't get the DP just like drunk drivers who kill don't get executed. And yet this arsonist does get death and that doesn't seem fair.

Originally posted by Make Speed Limit 45Yes, they are the same thing and i think smokers who fall asleep and burn down a house and kill someone should be prosecuted. But they seldom are and they certainly don't get the DP just like drunk drivers who kill don't get executed. And yet this arsonist does get death and that doesn't seem fair.

Most deadly house fires are caused by bad heaters or wiring. Most non fatal house fires are caused by food on the stove. The smokers starting fires in the house thing is WAY over blown (but smokers are evil so lets blame every fire on them huh?).

They also LOVE to suggest that smokers started these forest fires, just to throw that idea out there and let everyone think on it, then inevitably it comes out that it was an arsonist or some other cause.

Propoganda! Pure and simple!

[edit on 9-6-2009 by Sonya610]