Charles Manson DEAD at 83.

[MoonRiver]

Maybe his victims' families can get some peace now. No more parole hearing to attend, no more rantings from that psychopath, no more seeing his mug in the media.

[jcmaine72]

1. Good riddance to bad rubbish

I hate how Manson is always portrayed as a hippie by the media. Manson was a two-bit career thief, pimp, white supremacist and Reich wing scumbag extraordinaire who used drugs and dime store psychology to manipulate and control a handful of throwaways. He had far more in common with Trump and his legion of pea-brained deplorable zombies than with the hippie movement.

[RKP5637]

26. Yep, he dressed/appeared like a hippie, but inside was something diabolical, 180 degrees different

from a hippie. As you say, "more in common with Trump and his legion of pea-brained deplorable zombies than with the hippie movement."

[meow2u3]

2. Good riddance!

RIH*, Manson.

*Rot in hell.

[doc03]

3. I know it isn't politically correct but that scum should have been

executed 50 years ago.

[7962]

4. You're correct, regardless of whether its "politically correct" or not.

As was said in some movie long ago "Some folks just need killin'"

[Jarqui]

5. At some point, we have to accept that our resources are finite

So we have to make a choice.

We have been making that choice since Manson was convicted:

spend money to keep an animal like Manson incarcerated for 40+ years or use that money to help some innocent youngsters survive and get a chance at life (for example). And yes, i'm aware that it costs money to terminate a prisoner but that's something that could be looked at too.

I can think of many "better" ways to spend the money that was spent keeping Manson alive.

If it's politically incorrect to think that way, so be it.

[Mariana]

11. It is more expensive to execute an animal like Manson

than it is to keep him locked up for 40+ years.

[Jarqui]

18. Some analysis says that

Some question that analysis - including me.

One way or the other, I think it's time to look at how we're spending that money. Some of these things we're spending that money on is money that potentially could be better spent elsewhere.

There comes a time when we have to think outside of the box.

Maybe we have to cut down the appeals process. Maybe instead of spending all the legal fees arguing on which drugs to use and buying those expensive drugs, we confiscate 30 round clips from the wackjobs who shouldn't own these weapons and offer that ammunition to the family members of Manson's victims rather than pay an executioner. Heck, if they make the execution pay-per-view, they might make a bundle towards incarcerating other nasty prisoners. Or have a lottery for who gets to pull the trigger.

I say the above with some sarcasm - lacking in sincerity of the specific proposals - to try to shock into thinking about better ways because I'm convinced that what we're presently doing - spending all this money keeping an animal like Manson alive - is not money well spent when we have innocent children dying or doing without as an opportunity cost.

Manson gave up his obligation for me to give him a second thought when he disposed of his victims in the way that he did.

[SCantiGOP]

22. Great logic

Let’s kill people to show that it is wrong to kill people.
The death penalty is arbitrary, racist and ineffective. I really don’t see how it could ever be supported on a forum like DU.
How many white men were executed for raping or killing black citizens in the 11 States of the Confederacy from 1865 to 1965? You know the answer is zero.
Unless you contend that racism has been eradicated in the South and elsewhere, how can anyone advocate for the death penalty?

[Jarqui]

24. You're the one interjecting race into this - not me. I never brought it up.

It is a separate issue which has nothing to do with the economic argument that our resources are limited regardless of race.

And you're the one constructing this strawman:
"Let’s kill people to show that it is wrong to kill people. "

I'm saying with limited resources, let's spend that money on saving those from death who are more deserving than letting them quietly go sight unseen without those resources that are instead used to sustain the Charlie Mansons of this world.

We know for every million Americans without healthcare, roughly 1,000 die annually. I'd rather a few innocent, law abiding young Americans get that money to keep them alive than us spending on keeping the Charles Mansons of this country alive and well.

The limits of our resources is what forces us to make this choice.

I could turn around your strawman from:
"Let’s kill people to show that it is wrong to kill people. "
to
"Let's kill innocent women and children quietly behind the scenes by depriving them of the resources they need to sustain themselves so that we can pretend it's wrong to kill more noticeable criminal people by keeping renown mass murders like Charlie Manason alive and well!"

[SCantiGOP]

37. Of course race is interjected into any discussion on the death penalty

Are you also opposed to interjecting money into a discussion of income inequality?

The death penalty is, and will always be, inherently racist. It is secondary that geography and wealth/ability to have proper legal representation are also such strong factors.

Again, surprised and disheartened to see this even being discussed on DU.

[Jarqui]

39. Racism is interjected into any discussion on many issues but nearly always by choice

Just like racist behavior is a choice.

There is no racist law on the books that I'm aware of that says black men should be put to death more frequently than white men. Show me where I am wrong in the actual law itself. Now the practice and statistics are very different then the law - proportionately, black men are being put to death far more frequently than they should - but that is the practice - not what the law says. So it's not the law that is the problem. It is the application of the law unfairly tied to racist attitudes that is closer to defining this problem.

Just like there is no law on the books that I'm aware of that says cops should shoot more unarmed black men in the back than white men. So again, it's not the law on the books itself that is the problem. It is the application of that law unfairly tied to racist attitudes within law enforcement that is closer to defining that problem.

Just like there is no law that says more black men should be incarcerated than white men ... but we know the statistics do not lie. Racism is the problem - not the law itself.

"Thou shall not steal" means that regardless of race, no one should steal. But more blacks get pinched for it.

I will never accept that no law is any good just because some ignorant racist might abuse it. The law is not the problem in those circumstances. The racism is. We have laws against discrimination etc but we have a ways to go before we attain true equality in practice.

Interjecting race clouds the legal issue on any particular law.

Regardless of race, we have a choice to make on how our finite money gets spent: on death row criminals or kids who need medical care for example. That is the choice of what I'm talking about.

If you want to try to mix that up with all the wrongs in our society related to race, that's your prerogative. But that is not what I'm talking about. That's a very different problem - affecting many, many things in our society to the determent of minorities.

[SCantiGOP]

42. There is no racist law on the books...

Read that sentence again and you will understand that it is much easier for me to put you on Ignore than to try to respond reasonably to that.
Goodbye.

[Jarqui]

43. Taking it out of context doesn't make a reasonable point

This what the whole sentence said.

"There is no racist law on the books that I'm aware of that says black men should be put to death more frequently than white men"

Show us where such a law exists on the books - quote it. That is a reasonable request for response.

But it's a rhetorical question because as your lack of response illustrates, no such law exists.

Racism exists in how the laws are getting applied - not in how the laws are written.

Shifting money from sustaining the Charles Mansons of the prison system to, for example, children's healthcare is also not racist in theory or in it's planning.

I welcome myself to your ignore list.

[Mariana]

25. It's not Manson who deserves a second thought from you.

It's the innocent guy who might be executed under the same law - which becomes much more likely to happen if you cut the appeals process. It's really easy to forget about the innocent guy while you're thinking about someone like Manson.

[Jarqui]

31. So does the innocent child without healthcare - and they may well be more deserving

of my attention vs a criminal who has killed someone and the debate is whether they're deserving of death or life in prison. My sympathies are with the kids.

Maybe we look at the automatic appeal for example - and make it not so automatic to save money - pending that it makes sense and doesn't cost innocent lives vs the alternatives.

Some small percentage of prisoners who are often criminal but innocent of the capital crime may die .... saving more young lives. I don't know that for sure but I'm asking that tough question. Unless we ask those tough questions or as long as we carry on without those answers, I cannot blindly go along with it.

If it turns out that spending $5 more saves an innocent prisoner's life and wouldn't make a comparable difference spent elsewhere, I'm all for it.

As the population grows disproportionately to the dollars we have to sustain it, we have some tough choices to make. I'm asking the tough questions. I want the tough answers to help guide us to the fairest results for all citizens.

[rsdsharp]

38. I don't necessarily disagree with the sentiment,

but I would point out that 50 years ago was nearly two years before the Tate/LaBianca murders occurred.

[doc03]

40. They wouldn't have been murdered then, see I would have

saved their lives.

[rsdsharp]

41. Yeah, that whole due process thing is overrated.

[Submariner]

6. I hope he had a nurse that laughed at him

as he begged for help to breath.

[njhoneybadger]

7. That's one less potential candidate for the Republican Party

[bdamomma]

13. nt

[RKP5637]

27. K&R!!!! n/t

[MFM008]

29. Boom

[LittleGirl]

8. Good, he's the reason I say close Gitmo

Because if we can house that lunatic until he dies, we can close Gitmo and bring those still there into the states until they die.

[Siwsan]

9. The World is a little brighter, and Hell is a little hotter, for his passing

Debra Tate, the sister of Sharon Tate, said she prayed for his soul. No matter what your stand on deities, I think that speaks highly of her humanity. I doubt most would be able to conjure up that kind of generosity of spirit.

[MoonRiver]

15. Her prayers won't help. Just saying. eom

[Siwsan]

23. I'm in total agreement with you.

Whether one believes in Hell or in Karma. in both or neither, Manson was an irredeemable monster.

[Nitram]

10. Perhaps the most interesting thing about Manson's conviction is that he was not present at any of

the murders. Vincent Bugliosi, the prosecutor at Manson's trial, had to persuade the jury that he was responsible for the murders because he had brainwashed his followers.

[bdamomma]

12. a hot space

is waiting for him in HELL.

[HAB911]

14. And just for reference, heres Trump & Manson side-by-side.

Link to tweet

[cannabis_flower]

19. At first glance

I thought Manson was a Klingon

[HAB911]

20. Looks just like Worf

[smirkymonkey]

16. Good. One down.

[Dopers_Greed]

17. Surprised that he didn't get a Dump Cabinet appointment

[Cryptoad]

21. I am sorry he has been freed from his Hell,,,

,,,of from being caged like an the animal he was..

[PunksMom]

28. I think they didnt execute him because

They want his brain for study, research. I heard that a few years ago. I’m one of thousands, I’m sure, who really couldn’t care less that he is gone. He chose his path, whatever is out there next, is what he deserves.

[Corvo Bianco]

34. Couldn't they cut off his head and preserve the brain?

Do the lethal injections destroy the brain? I don't even know what the preferred method of execution is these days.

[LeftInTX]

35. He was originally given the death penalty

But the US Supreme Court ruled the death penalty unconstitutional in 1972. Every death row inmate in the US had their sentences commuted to life.

A few years later the death penalty was reinstated.

[Aristus]

30. The pastor at my church states that

everyone gets eternal life. Where you get to spend it is up to you.

Manson chose......poorly......

[workinclasszero]

32. Trump still on the loose....

[Corvo Bianco]

33. Pretty sad. He could have been GOP senator some day.

[oneshooter]

44. Cerebus is now using him as a chew toy.

Till the end of time.