# 3 Dead 10 Wounded at Belgian Daycare



## MA-Caver (Jan 23, 2009)

Horrible, and another reason to support the death penalty! 
One wonders if we are going to need armed security at places where children play, learn and grow? 
So sad that these children will have the scars on their hearts as well as their bodies. Hopefully Belgian justice will do what's right to this animal. Temporarily insane or not, he owes the lives of 3 and deserves the pains & fear of the 10 all at once. 



> *3 dead, 10 wounded in Belgium day care stabbings*
> 
> By SLOBODAN LEKIC, Associated Press Writer        Slobodan Lekic, Associated Press Writer               26 mins ago
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090123/ap_on_re_eu/eu_belgium_stabbingsDENDERMONDE, Belgium  A man went on a rampage at a Belgium day care center Friday, stabbing two young children and a female worker to death and slashing 10 other children all over their bodies, officials said.
> ...


----------



## Sukerkin (Jan 23, 2009)

So sad to read of such things . 

The fragility of the human mind and the violence that can ensure when it breaks down are quite frightening.

If the offender is genuinely unbalanced tho', I can't in all conscience agree with the sentiment of ultimate sanction.  The legal phrasings of 'unsound mind' and 'diminished responsibility' might be overused by those seeking to escape the consequences of their actions but that does not make them ungenuine in all cases.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Mar 1, 2009)

Belgian newbie here.

Noise has died down, but last I heard, the temporary insanity is unconvincing and he seems to have known what he was doing. It also seems that his behavior is different (more 'psycho') when he knows people are watching him.

This was a tragedy, but not one which could have been avoided. society has no protection against a nut case deciding to go on a killing spree. The miracle is that there were only 3 deaths.

Depending on his conviction, he is either committed for life in a prison psych ward, or locked away for life (with possibility for parole). No death penalty here. Or in any country which is member of the EU.


----------



## exile (Mar 1, 2009)

Bruno@MT said:


> Belgian newbie here.
> 
> Noise has died down, but last I heard, the temporary insanity is unconvincing and he seems to have known what he was doing. It also seems that his behavior is different (more 'psycho') when he knows people are watching him.
> 
> ...



I'm ashamed to say that when I hear stories like this, my thought is, 'no death penalty? Prison for life? _Fine_&#8212;no quarrel... as long as the prison in question is an _oubliette_. And I mean, a _Mediæval_ oubliette, built for people who were six/seven inches or so shorter on average than we  are. 

It's a bad thought, but I can't help it&#8212;I think of my little boy, when he was that age, and nothing else seems fair.


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 1, 2009)

I can only imagine as aparent what those must have felt like, bring back the death pealty so we can rest assure people like this will never be able to see daylight again.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Mar 1, 2009)

My heart and thoughts go out to those parents and their children.  I am always saddened and angered when someone does some thing like this. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





  What a tragedy.


----------



## Thesemindz (Mar 1, 2009)

Sukerkin said:


> So sad to read of such things .
> 
> The fragility of the human mind and the violence that can ensure when it breaks down are quite frightening.
> 
> If the offender is genuinely unbalanced tho', I can't in all conscience agree with the sentiment of ultimate sanction. The legal phrasings of 'unsound mind' and 'diminished responsibility' might be overused by those seeking to escape the consequences of their actions but that does not make them ungenuine in all cases.


 
Why not?

Let's go ahead and assume, just for the sake of this discussion, that this person is completely insane. He is every mitigating factor you care to apply. Unsound mind. Diminished responsibility. Maybe even throw in an abusive childhood, a drug addiction, poverty, and social abandonment. He doesn't know the difference between right and wrong, he can't be "fixed," and he can't be trusted not to do the exact same thing, or worse, again if he's ever allowed back into society.

So our options are -

1. Lock him up forever in a mental institution. Attempt to rehabilitate him, knowing that doing so is ultimately impossible. Pay to feed, house, clothe, and medicate him. Keep him under constant surveillance, both for his safety and the safety of those around him. Never allow him to associate with society on any meaningful level again. Wait until he dies of natural causes.

2. Put him in a prison system where he is both subjected to and the subject of ongoing brutality for the remainder of his natural life. Pay to feed, house, clothe, and medicate him. Never allow him to associate with society on any meaningful level again. Wait until he dies of natural causes.

3. Execute him as humanely as possible, with as little time between cause and effect as can be allowed while still requiring due dilligence on the part of the prosecuting agency to ensure that the execution is warranted and necessary. Allow for all possible appeals, but do so quickly and without any needless delaying or postponing tactics. Make the ultimate goal reaching the correct decision, but doing so quickly, and execute sentencing immediately upon the exhaustion of the appeals process.

4. Release him back into society and cross your fingers.

Now remember, for the purposes of this thought experiment, this person is completely unsalvagable. None of those mitigating factors change the reality of the moment. He is a cruel, bloodthirsty animal who can never be made whole. He will recommit. What is the best option?

I should note at this time, that I believe in the ultimate penalty for violent offenders, but not in allowing the government, any government, to exercise that authority. They can not be trusted. They will abuse _every_ authority they are ever given, without exception. Giving them the authority to end lives, any lives, gives them far too much power and allows for unconsionable abuses of that authority which *will* occur.

But purely as a thought experiment, for me the answer is clear.


-Rob


----------



## arnisador (Mar 1, 2009)

How terrible.


----------

