If That Soldier In Afghanistan Is Guilty Of Mass Murder, He Deserves The Ultimate Penalty
When a serial killer is caught or there’s a mass murder, people always want to know why.
Why did they do it? What made them snap?
Once you get past Muslims killing people in the name of Allah, which is unfortunately all too common, the answers people get are seldom satisfactory. We hear people blame video games, bullies, video, stress, marital problems, losing jobs, etc., etc. Thing is, there are tens of millions of people who have been exposed to the exact same stimulus who haven’t gone on a killing spree.
What it ultimately gets down to is that some people have an extremely rare combination of experiences, genetics, and irrational thoughts that make killing people seem like a rational response to stress or solving their problems. Even if one of those people had an incentive to truly explain it, it probably wouldn’t make a lot of sense because it’s irrational.
For example, there simply is no good reason for an American soldier to massacre 16 random Afghan civilians, including 9 children and 3 women. People can claim he was stressed, drunk, had marital problems, etc., etc., — it just doesn’t matter.
If he’s guilty, his reasons don’t matter very much. Nor does the fact that he had previously served honorably, since his dishonorable behavior is a disgrace to the uniform. What does matter is that a lot of innocent people were slaughtered and if he did it, then he deserves the death penalty.
FacebookTwitterEmail President Bush warned the nation about what would happen if we left Iraq too soon. Now that Obama has
FacebookTwitterEmail Peter Wehner writes about Obama’s decision to draw down troops in Afghanistan, something that (just coincidentally, of course) will
FacebookTwitterEmail Will Eric Holder use his highly politicized Justice Department to investigate? (LA Times) The Justice Department should enter the