<p>"This is precisely the kind of stuff that happens all the time, yet you only make note of it now because of a publicized case you can relate to, in a state where such criminal activity is usually unheard of. Bravo."</p>
<p>Um, excuse me? Do you have any idea when I make note of cases such as these? It's not as though I ever stated that this was in any way an isolated case...or that I am not aware that it happens, often, to families who are not as prominent. You have no idea why I make note of it, nor if I do when a similar thing happens in Kansas or Utah or Kinshasa. Puuuuuhlease, don't presume to know me.</p>
<p>VeryHappy, I didn't use the word "mean", so I don't know why you put the word in quotation marks. I also prefaced my statement by mentioning that I am generally against the death penalty (because I, too, don't condone state-sanctioned killing) but I think it's absurd to say that a government that employs it is "just as low" as the perpetrators of this crime.</p>
<p>I generally oppose the death penalty on a number of grounds, but in this particular case, I have no problem seeing these two individuals executed if they're found guilty -- which seems virtually certain at this point. The facts, if proven, certainly warrant it. One thing is certain: even if they were sentenced to life in prison, they wouldn't survive there for very long. The unspoken code in prison is "no women, no children." Given what they're accused of, these guys wouldn't last a week.</p>
<p>Unregistered, I put the word "mean" in quotes not because I was quoting you, but to emphasize that the word "mean" was a feeble adjective for what they did. I could have said "nasty" or "violent" or "heinous." Using "mean" was a gross understatement; hence, the quotes.</p>
<p>On that note: Why did you put "just as low" in quotes?</p>
<p>Ahhhh -- yes, I see I did use that phrase. Thanks, Unregistered.</p>
<p>I still don't understand why people think that killing others is an appropriate form of punishment. Or is it revenge? In my opinion, I don't think it dissuades others from committing similar crimes, because in my opinion people who commit similar crimes aren't exactly thinking rationally.</p>
<p>I don't understand people who claim that killing is an inappropriate form of punishment on the grounds that it is inhumane...and then somehow claim the higher moral ground by saying "let them rot in jail/eternal solitary confinement, etc etc etc". </p>
<p>I don't think the death penalty is particularly humane...then again, neither is solitary confinement. On the other hand, I don't think a punishment necessarily has to be "humane" in response to a crime this heinous. </p>
<p>I don't know if the death penalty deters crime...if it did, that would be the soundest reason for its existence. I do think that revenge is a primary reason for people supporting the death penalty...and it's perfectly understandable. Who wouldn't, on some visceral level, want revenge on these men, if they were in the father's position? I'm not justifying it, but I would understand and think that he were in some way within his bounds if he chose to kill them himself. </p>
<p>I don't believe that death is always a bad thing (I support abortion and euthanasia under most circumstances) and I think that, if the main aim of punishment is to ensure the safety of innocent people, one of two things must be done: Violent criminals (those beyond the possibility of rehabiliation, at least) must be locked up, or they must be executed. I don't think that either option is necessarily more humane than the other, but one of them is irreversible, so unless people are 150% positive that the accused are guilty, I am opposed to the death penalty. It's really the only reason that I oppose it; the inherent injustices within the system.</p>
<p>"Zuma, I assume you live near Cheshire. One question that keeps being asked is how long it took from the time the mother alerted the bank teller until the police arrived at the house. Do you have any idea? (There are mumblings that if the poolice had gotten there sooner, a lot of the tragedy could have been avoided.)"</p>
<p>VeryHappy, the first four links below give a time line that makes your question difficult to answer at the moment. The police are not talking. The next three links, in readers' comments, raise the same issues raised here. The last link is a message to the Dartmouth community.</p>
<p>unregistered, i suppose the common ideal is that a punishment, no matter how heinous the crime, must not sink to the level, or near the level of the crime of which the reparations are being made for. Yet is punishment not inhumane either? this is a common schism in quakerism and society, because to accomplish what is defined as justification, something of equal caliber must be enflicted on the doer of the wrong deed, yet isnt this just repeating his crime in a coveted form (one of the most important quaker tennants: two wrongs dont make a right)? this is where religion comes in because humans must deal with morals when dealing with justification, so religion i suppose (in one of is many purposes) acts as a reassurnace that justice will be served by a higher order that is not bound by morals.</p>
<p>Classicalguitar8: By "a higher order," you mean perhaps God??</p>
<p>I don't even think we should have hanged Saddam Hussein. I'm hardpressed to understand how George W. can talk about valuing life in terms of prohibiting abortions and stem cell research, but be completely gung-ho when it comes to capital punishment.</p>
<p>i said higher order to encompass both poly and monotheistic religions, in order to avoid discrediting anyones beliefs and dont even get me started on politics involving GW</p>
<p>I grew up in Cheshire but live a few towns away from there now. I know the family of the younger suspect, having gone to local schools with his uncle. In fact this younger suspect lives on a road connected to the one I grew up on and where my sister and her family still live. It has been surreal following the news of this tragedy, set in places very familiar to me. (My family has multiple Dartmouth ties as well). </p>
<p>Someone posted a question earlier about whether the police could have gotten to the house sooner and averted the disaster. We will probably never know. I was talking to a friend with a police scanner who happened to be home on the morning that all of this unfolded. He heard the police transmissions from the time that the 911 call came in from the bank teller right through the various police and fire department response activities at the family's house. As one can imagine there was a lot of confusion and probably some miscommunications that went on between the various responders. Without elaborating, I get the sense that the police might have gone into the house slightly sooner but whether or not it would have changed the outcome for the better is impossible to know. All in all, I think the police department responded quickly and in the best way they could, having to rely on training in a situation unheard of in most towns, let alone a quiet suburb like Cheshire. </p>
<p>My heart goes out to Dr Petit who spoke beautifully about his wife and daughters in front of nearly 2000 people at a public memorial service on Saturday despite the fact that he had only just been released from the hospital a couple days before.</p>