100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Should Susan Atkins | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
be allowed to die at home or left to finish her life sentence in jail? She is dying of brain cancer and cost the state of California 865,000 dollars last year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I believe so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I believe so. You believe what? She should be allowed to die at home? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vs costing the state how much for her medical/housing etc expenses while being a free woman?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I believe so. You believe what? She should be allowed to die at home? yes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vs costing the state how much for her medical/housing etc expenses while being a free woman? I do not have that answer. I know she will be housed by her brother and husband at no expense to the state. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vs costing the state how much for her medical/housing etc expenses while being a free woman? I do not have that answer. I know she will be housed by her brother and husband at no expense to the state. going only on the info you have provided - I'd rather she remained in jail for her heinous crimes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If she has some one willing to take her in, it saves the state that kind of money and she is dying..yea, let her go. Not like she is really going to be "free" while dying of brain cancer. A life in prison and death by brain cancer I'd say she has paid her debt...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Doubt she will save the state of CA any monies, as I am certain she has a exisiting condition which will make securing any medical insurance almost impossible and unaffordable.
She should remain in jail - and she can be free when she leaves this realm - I am compassionate for the families brought havoc to. just my opinion |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
CleanBathroom
on
Fri 08/07/09 12:14 PM
|
|
It's tough for us to make a decsion without all the facts of the case: how long she has, who she will pay her medical costs at home, how will she be guarded on house arrest, etc.
The state is in bad shape financially (duh). This seems like a way to pocket some money but at what expense without harming the perception in Cali that criminals with money and political clout are above the law? And how does releasing her affect deterrence and what precedent will it set for others with the means to escape their sentence? I'd say releasing her is way too dangerous for the legal system, despite my tendency to want to give people dignity. Glad we have a topic to make one think today, though. Thanks to the OP. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It makes no sense to keep her in jail because we still have lingering anxiety over what she did. She's no threat to anyone at this point, might as well let her die at home.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Doubt she will save the state of CA any monies, as I am certain she has a exisiting condition which will make securing any medical insurance almost impossible and unaffordable. She should remain in jail - and she can be free when she leaves this realm - I am compassionate for the families brought havoc to. just my opinion I also feel compassion for the families she bought havoc to, also to her.. just how my heart works. Was a horrifying thing... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It makes no sense to keep her in jail because we still have lingering anxiety over what she did. She's no threat to anyone at this point, might as well let her die at home. makes plenty of sense Boo, are you also going to allow any and all prisoners who have one ailment or another (which ones) (who will pick) the luxury to die at a place surrounded by loved ones when they in fact have been proven guilty of taken the lives of others. The deceased did not have the luxury why should they. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I say keep her *** in jail.What should we just let every killer who is dying out of jain then?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When she was sentenced to life in prison it wasn't "life in prison unless the state goes broke" or "unless she gets a sad illness". She didn't ask Sharon Tate and the other unfortunate people she helped kill, "Are you ill? Do you feel okay?" In fact, Sharon Tate pleaded for her life and the life of her unborn child and Atkins didn't give a rat's behind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It makes no sense to keep her in jail because we still have lingering anxiety over what she did. She's no threat to anyone at this point, might as well let her die at home. makes plenty of sense Boo, are you also going to allow any and all prisoners who have one ailment or another (which ones) (who will pick) the luxury to die at a place surrounded by loved ones when they in fact have been proven guilty of taken the lives of others. The deceased did not have the luxury why should they. I am not talking about what she did, I am talking about the pointlessness of keeping an aged dying criminal in jail where we foot the bill. She has not escaped her punishment, hell she is dying, I find no pleasure in that, and I wouldn't even if it was one of my family members. what more do we want? Should we punish her family members too, I wonder, or have they not suffered our judgement along with her all these years? It's been done for over 30 years now right? What is interesting here is that we talk about forgiveness and non judgement and yet we want to drive the last nail even 30 years later. I though what she did was horrid and I don't justify what she did. But she is old and dying.. what harm is she to anyone. I say send her home to her family and show that we are bigger than what she did. I probably didn't say that right but oh well. Now would I let Manson out, hell no. He'd have to be crippled and mindless before I would. suggest that. Maybe I am all wrong on this, but personally I don't give a damn about her, I just see no point in being her caretaker any longer than nessessary. Maybe it's just too hot to think today... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The so-called "Manson Family" committed a series of nine murders. "Sadie" was convicted of participating in eight of those. She wrote "pig" on the front door in Sharon Tate's blood (and allegedly tasted said blood). She was originally sentenced to death, but it got commuted to life in prison. She married twice while in prison, and has had conjugal visits. Despite being in prison, she's still "lived", while Sharon Tate and all the others wer dead and buried. As far as I'm concerned, she can die in prison, and then rot in Hell. She had absolutely no mercy, compassion, or remorse for her victims, so why should she get any better treatment for her crimes? No clemency for her!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It makes no sense to keep her in jail because we still have lingering anxiety over what she did. She's no threat to anyone at this point, might as well let her die at home. makes plenty of sense Boo, are you also going to allow any and all prisoners who have one ailment or another (which ones) (who will pick) the luxury to die at a place surrounded by loved ones when they in fact have been proven guilty of taken the lives of others. The deceased did not have the luxury why should they. I am not talking about what she did, I am talking about the pointlessness of keeping an aged dying criminal in jail where we foot the bill. She has not escaped her punishment, hell she is dying, I find no pleasure in that, and I wouldn't even if it was one of my family members. what more do we want? Should we punish her family members too, I wonder, or have they not suffered our judgement along with her all these years? It's been done for over 30 years now right? What is interesting here is that we talk about forgiveness and non judgement and yet we want to drive the last nail even 30 years later. I though what she did was horrid and I don't justify what she did. But she is old and dying.. what harm is she to anyone. I say send her home to her family and show that we are bigger than what she did. I probably didn't say that right but oh well. Now would I let Manson out, hell no. He'd have to be crippled and mindless before I would. suggest that. Maybe I am all wrong on this, but personally I don't give a damn about her, I just see no point in being her caretaker any longer than nessessary. Maybe it's just too hot to think today... Boo, we'd still all be her caretaker if she's released. Mr_Music expressed it best. Why should she or her family get to spend time with her outside of jail? The other families aren't able to enjoy any time with their deceased family members, hell she was even getting 'a lil "sumtin" "sumtin" while in jail, none of the deceased did. Rot in jail - she'll be free when she passes away. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It makes no sense to keep her in jail because we still have lingering anxiety over what she did. She's no threat to anyone at this point, might as well let her die at home. makes plenty of sense Boo, are you also going to allow any and all prisoners who have one ailment or another (which ones) (who will pick) the luxury to die at a place surrounded by loved ones when they in fact have been proven guilty of taken the lives of others. The deceased did not have the luxury why should they. I am not talking about what she did, I am talking about the pointlessness of keeping an aged dying criminal in jail where we foot the bill. She has not escaped her punishment, hell she is dying, I find no pleasure in that, and I wouldn't even if it was one of my family members. what more do we want? Should we punish her family members too, I wonder, or have they not suffered our judgement along with her all these years? It's been done for over 30 years now right? What is interesting here is that we talk about forgiveness and non judgement and yet we want to drive the last nail even 30 years later. I though what she did was horrid and I don't justify what she did. But she is old and dying.. what harm is she to anyone. I say send her home to her family and show that we are bigger than what she did. I probably didn't say that right but oh well. Now would I let Manson out, hell no. He'd have to be crippled and mindless before I would. suggest that. Maybe I am all wrong on this, but personally I don't give a damn about her, I just see no point in being her caretaker any longer than nessessary. Maybe it's just too hot to think today... Boo, we'd still all be her caretaker if she's released. Mr_Music expressed it best. Why should she or her family get to spend time with her outside of jail? The other families aren't able to enjoy any time with their deceased family members, hell she was even getting 'a lil "sumtin" "sumtin" while in jail, none of the deceased did. Rot in jail - she'll be free when she passes away. Well Fran, I can't say I don't understand that. Frankly I don't really care one way or the other to be completely honest. If she is going to get the same support out as in then keep her in I suppose. I just don't think her family deserves to be punished along with her, but again I don't care enough about it to make a big fuss. She really means nothing to me. I remember reading the book about them many years ago and was absolutely disgusted, so I do understand where you are coming from.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Katzenschnauzer
on
Sat 08/08/09 07:10 PM
|
|
All due respect, you didn't hear me talk about forgiveness on this issue. Sounds also like there's more compassion going on for Atkins' family than Sharon Tate's, the LaBianca's, Abigail Folger's (and others) families. If it hadn't been for the bleeding hearts in California in '69 that voted down the death penalty, Atkins would have been toast long ago.
|
|
|
|
|
