There has been some talk bantered about on some news-talk shows about making Tim's execution public. Some folks think it would be a media circus, others think its too gory, others believe it should be private, and still others think folks would treat it as a form of entertainment.

Though I don't think he should be a scapegoat, I believe he should be executed. I have some rather radical opinions on the whole issue - aside from the 'victim'.

First, what is wrong with it being public? Then at least folks would understand that this really happens... I personally think we should bring back the public scaffold. Unsure whether public attendance should be mandatory or not.....

I think a lot more folks would think twice about some stuff if they were forced to watch people who did these things die.

About the entertainment value... I suppose there would be those who relished watching the death of another. There have always been those warped souls who actually enjoy death. But, is it so different from the mobs that turned out in previous ages???

Why should this be a private thing... The crime certainly wasn't... There are folks all around OK City who need 'closure' - not just the immediate families of the victims. There are folks around the country that would like to see that he is dead - whatever their reasons.

Media circus???? Isn't that the definition of a 'news' crew anyway??? What would be so different?

I don't know that I would watch.... I might out of pure curiosity to see what he would say. Of course - he is condemned also for having something to say. "We shouldn't be giving him a forum." Well, the Jews didn't 'get a forum' in Germany, did they???

-- Sue Diederich (willow666@rocketmail.com), April 23, 2001

Answers

I believe in execution for some crimes.I don't believe in executions where just a few "invited" "witnesses" are there.I think executions should be public and brutal.Death by hanging for common criminals or death by musketry for soldiers or those acting in open rebellion as soldiers.If executions were conducted in this way.THERE WOULD BE FAR FEWER OF THEM.It becomes too easy for the state when they can kill a man as easily as putting a dog to "sleep" and it is too easy for the public to just not notice.If I was emperor for a day there would be written into statute that there would be several yearly execution days when no business could be conducted.Sort of like a national holiday without the merchentile opertunities.Every thing would stop.The public would not have to attend but they would damn well KNOW what was happening that day in their name.They would damn well know that people were being put to death that day and have to at least reflect on it when they couldn't buy a tank of gas or an ice cream cone that day.Killing even in the name of justice should NEVER be easy.

-- greg (gsmith@tricountyi.net), April 23, 2001.

I agree with Greg's last sentence completely. Killing shouldn't be easy.

I am 100% against televised execution of anyone for any reason whatsoever. That completely trivializes the entire thing and causes further detachment from the FACT that a life is being taken. I think that it is regrettable that some of the victims family members are going to watch McVeigh be killed via closed circuit tv. They should be flown to the prison and made to watch it in person. It will give them closure, I guess.

Honestly, I don't think McVeigh should be executed at all. I think his superiors should be. I think he was just a good soldier and did what he was told. The "confession" is questionable. There is no way that he and Terry nichols could have mixed 7000 pounds of ammonium nitrate in one evening. If they could have, how come the blast was from the inside of the building? Why were all the BATF and FBI told not to come in?

Sorry, but the guy who is going to die here isn't the one who cooked this idea up. In my opinion, they don't want to "give him a forum" because they don't want the truth to be heard. A man about to lose his life really has nothing to lose by telling the truth. I DO NOT think he is a hero. I think he was a stupid idiot that followed someone's orders and is now going to pay for doing it.

-- Doreen (bisquit@here.com), April 23, 2001.

I agree with Doreen. As a friend of mine said, "Tim McVeigh doesn't look smart enough to pull that off. Hell, he don't look smart enough to empty a boot!" Well, I think he was just smart enough to do what he was told, and take the fall for the ones who really did it.

As for public executions, if there are to be executions, they should all be public. They should not be lethal injections. They should be hangings or beheadings. They should be quick enough to not be torture, and awful enough that the public would be horrified. The public needs to be aware of the price of justice. And it should never, ever be televised. That trivializes the whole thing. It becomes just another scene from a TV drama, soap opera, etc., and not a "real" occurance, with a real person dying. Instead, the execution should be photographed, and should be on the front page of every newspaper, news magazine, and the lead story of every TV news coverage for that week, not just a day.

-- Green (ratdogs10@yahoo.com), April 24, 2001.

I am of the opinion that Tim really didn't pull this off... at least not by himself. I do not know whether he is guilty of only following orders or not.

I don't like killing - even when its just food to eat. But, I DO think there is a place for public execution, and that attendance should be, if not mandatory, then at least compulsory...

Because I find most of the 'law' in this country to be contrary to reason, I don't think just any crime should be punishable by death, but there are a few... I don't have any statistics on the crime rates in countries like Malaysia (where they still cut off your hand if you steal, etc etc) but I would imagine that they are quite low. Now if we could just make sure that our 'crimes' are really crimes, I'd be all for it... But, in our country, too many people are jailed for 'crimes' that are no one else's damned business. Some even die for them... but THOSE murder(er)s are never prosecuted.......

Didn't mean to give anybody the wrong idea -

-- Sue Diederich (willow666@rocketmail.com), April 24, 2001.

Sue you mentioned it before in other posts (see I noticed)We DO have far too many behaviors defined as crimes today.Drug laws are some of the worst.financial crimes etc.And no folks I don't indulge other that the odd cigar(tobacco)and a pint of stout.I think you should be able to buy or grow any damn thing you please as well as smoke it, shoot it or insert it rectally.There are many things that are immoral that should not by definition be illegal.I have a real problem with the establishment of FEDERAL death penalties(other than for treason or desertion in time of war)these should be reserved to the several states.Well I don't expect that we will need to trouble ourselves with federal crimes for much longer......We will be facing a UN court and a UN judge.(no jury. just the judge)As far as putting executions on Tv I have no problem with that.Only one proviso.THERE WILL BE NO OTHER PROGRAMING THAT DAY!No turning on a rerun of I Love Lucy if you don't like what you see.The set still has an off button.

-- greg (gsmith@tricountyi.net), April 25, 2001.

No television. It would become just another "reality Based" drama show. People don't seem to be able to sort out the difference between TV and the real world as it is. The execution would not really be real for most Dumb A** people in this country. Just another "event" w/ a celebrity host, hyped to the max. Oh Man, I'm thinking about the "Running Man" movie now.

As for Tim, I doubt he and Nichols were the only ones involved. But, even if all he did was drive the truck there, he deserves what he is getting. I may Honk off a few of you guys telling you this, but I offered my services as an RN, licensed by the State of Indiana, to the warden to start Tim's IV when the nuke him in May. I haven't yet, nor do I expect to get an answer from the warden regarding that offer. But I made it in all seriousness. I'm sure that will land me on ANOTHER list somewhere too! :]

If Janet Reno and/or Bill Clinton are ever convicted of the murders they are responsible for I will make my services available again.

-- John in S. IN (jsmengel@hotmail.com), April 26, 2001.

So John, do you think it should be public?

I understand what you are saying, but you didn't irk me. I just think the sad thing is that the people who plot and plan and are ultimately responsible for these particular deaths are not the ones being justly executed for the crime. I do not think McVeigh is lilly white innocent, but he is certainly the fall guy. I'd like the planners, please. That's the travesty of justice in this case.

Of course, those responsible will be accountable in the end.

-- Doreen (bisquit@here.com), April 26, 2001.

As to whether it should be a public specticle I have mixed emotions and thoughts. The whole "media circus" thing Sue spoke of is a good enough reason why not to it that way. A good sturdy gallows and a hanging does send a nice message tho........ I don't know. The old fashioned light 'em up at midnight w/ "ol sparky" wasn't so bad either. I don't think capital punishment really deters crime anyway. It is a GREAT way to reduce the repeat offender population.

I went to the Indiana State prison in Michigan City in 1984 (I think) when they executed Steven Judy. (That may have been 'ol sparky's last shot, I don't know) There was a BIG media push about how terrible the electric chair was, how capital punishment is so bad, Blah, Blah, Blah. Myself and a few friends went and sat on lawn chairs and drank beer while having the stereo cranked up to offset the candle holders having their vigil for "poor Steven". We wern't the only ones there rooting for sparky BTW. "poor Steven" had abducted a young mom and her 2 kids, ages 3&5. Drove to a out of the way place, repeatedly raped and then killed mom in front of the kids. Oh Yeah, then the SOB killed the kids too. He fried and I felt better about it.

Now that I think about it, No it shouldn't be public. Maybe they could build a gallows on the exercise yard and allow as many families to watch as needed to. That would allow a few of the dirt bags to see whats in store for them too.

-- John in S. IN (jsmengel@hotmail.com), April 27, 2001.

The point of making executions public....to me anyway is to make people see what is being carried out in their name.No media circus.No hiding the doings behind a prison wall.I believe in capital punishment for SOME crimes.I don't think capital punishment should be EASY not fot the state,not for the public,not for the executed.Not being critical of drinking beer outside the walls while a piece of crap fries.....There is a big difference when you look a man in the eye before and during his execution.I rather doubt that you would be in as much of a party mood if he was 20 feet away from you.The point of capital punishment is JUSTICE not deterance,not torture or a last chance at "closure" for a victim"s family.For instance if one MURDERS not just kills but murders.It is justice to forfeit ones life.I've stayed out of the OKC issue because it is not really germain to this larger issue.I too think there is much more to this than just one scapegoat.

-- greg (gsmith@tricountyi.net), April 27, 2001.

Well said Greg. Your probably right about this case not being a good one for this whole arguement. No easy answers in this world some time. I could look Tim in eye and then start the IV that would administer the drugs that will kill him. Justice yes, but I agree, not for all in this case. To many questions.

-- John (jsmengel@hotmail.com), April 27, 2001.