Nidal Hasan was recently found guilty for 13 counts of murder and 32 counts of all charges in connection with the shootings at a deployment processing center in November of 2009. Nidal targeted Afghanistan-bound soldiers, which resulted in one of the largest mass killings of military personnel on a post on U.S. soil. Nidal Hasan admitted to targeting soldiers, giving the reason that he wanted to protect the Taliban from the U.S. military. Hasan was an Army psychiatrist. Nidal was found guilty and is now waiting to see if he will get life in prison or the death penalty.
I think that this could go either way. If they give him life in prison he will have to live everyday in confinement, having to think every day about what he did. If he receives the death penalty, a criminal will no longer be alive, but is that letting him out to easy? If he is going to die in jail eventually do you think he would just want the death penalty? Which penalty should he receive?
Here is the link to the story: http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/24/us/nidal-hasan-court-martial/index.html?hpt=ju_t2
Replies
Jessica,
Excellent posts and great job replying to other people's comments!
I think it should be "a life for a life" so I think he should have the death sentence.
When it comes to the death penalty it kind of makes the executors sound like hypocrites. They are going to kill someone for killing other people? That means they would have to get the death penalty and so on and so forth. But then again he shouldn't live while all of those others died and have that be on his head. I think a life in prison would be much more suitable. He will have time to think about what he has done and and it will just continue to come back to him. Honestly, feeling guilty is the worst feeling ever so he should deal with it. So I'm just torn I think either punishment would be suitable.
I think he should get the death penalty but then I think he shouldn't. He does kind of deserve the death penalty because of all the people he killed, but then he doesn't because it just seems wrong to me to kill a person. He deserves both but I think he should get imprisoned for life so he can somewhat enjoy the rest of his life.
I think he deserves the death penalty. He definitely doesn't deserve jail, where he has a bed and three meals a day. He killed thirteen men and injured plenty others who are fighting for our rights and safety, he doesn't deserve to live.
You are the first person to really mention that these soldiers were going off to fight for our lives and no we are just going to keep this guy alive? Lots of people have been choosing the death penalty for this man.
I believe that all murders should result in the death penalty. If a person can be proven to have unjustly taken a life, then why do they get live and the other person dies? And why should we as American citizens pay (through taxes) for a murderer to live? With three warm meals a day and a guaranteed place to sleep at night? A lot of people nowadays who truly work hard don't even get that, and what have they done wrong?
You make a very good point. No only would it cost money to keep him alive but it is our tax money. They expect us to pay for his meals when some of us are struggling to pay for our own.
Everyone is saying life is a better option cause he gets to live with the guilt. I disagree. To kill as many people as he did he has to have mental issues. So what if he doesn't even feel guilt? What if he is proud of what he's done and almost counts his kills as achievements? I don't know if that's the case in this situation, but if i was one of the familys id want him dead.
I would say that he should have to spend the rest of his life in prison. If he received the death penalty, I feel that he would be getting out too easily. If he were to spend the rest of his life in prison, he would have to suffer for all of his life.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next