I feel bad for the guy. Here he was bullied into the whole thing and now he is sitting in suppermax for the rest of his life. I saw one old picture of him and his son Josh feeding a baby dear with a bottle by the woods and I dont think a nice guy like that whould be locked away in a tiny jail cell.
2007-07-02 02:06:58 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
No he shouldn't. He should do whatever he was sentenced to do. Is he innocent? Nope. He's a terrorist.
2007-07-02 02:13:18 · answer #1 · answered by Miss B 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Do you feel the same way about the terrorists who carried out the 9-11 attacks. Those that were areested and convicted, should they be released because they were, in effect brainwashed into doing what they did. Some of theme too have families.
Regardless of why Nichols did what he did, the victims of hi attack also had families. Sadly, it only takes a little bit of time to make a major mistake. Perhaps Nichols understands that now. However, there is no release for the families of those who died in that bombing. They will live with this for the rest of their life. Nichols should remain incarcerated for the rest of his, tragic as that is.
2007-07-02 09:11:50 · answer #2 · answered by toff 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Did he feed Bambi before or after conspiring to create and plant a weapon of mass destruction of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995?
Perhaps attorneys for all drunk drivers should publish pictures of their clients drinking bottles of Evian water with their children.
Oh, yes, and if this defense worked, can you imagine how many photos would suddenly appear on the net of pedophiles playing bingo with the elderly?
Give me a break. We each have a free will. Terry Nichols could have fled to the Phillipines to escape his bullies. Or, he could have chosen to report them to the feds BEFORE the destruction occurred.
A Bambi defense, indeed.
By the way, did they ever discover who suffocated the child of his second wife just before she gave birth to his biological son?
Also, when was the photo taken of him with his alleged child who was born less than two years before the bombings.
His child will bear a lifetime of guilt associated with his father's choices in life. The boy's image should not be used now to excuse what an evil individual did.
2007-07-02 09:26:47 · answer #3 · answered by Beach Saint 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you know how many die because of what Terry Nicholes did?
There is blood on Terry's hands and he should rot in a super max because those who die won't be able to enjoy anymore days with their families. So why should he ever be free again.
2007-07-02 09:13:06 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No.
Feeding a baby deer does not necessarily mean one is a nice person. I don't think the families of those he killed in OKC would think he is a nice person. He should stay where he is, for the rest of his life.
2007-07-02 09:12:19 · answer #5 · answered by Dinah Steeler 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
why dont you come here to Oklahoma and ask a few people that question , and make sure you look at the pictures of the daycare he helped to blow -up. no , he should never get out unless its in a casket.
2007-07-02 10:48:15 · answer #6 · answered by Christy 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yep, let's start releasing people who kill innocent civilians in terror attacks. In fact, lets shut down Gitmo too and give all the captives there instant citizenship.
2007-07-02 09:09:30 · answer #7 · answered by civil_av8r 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Yes. Just as soon as the people he killed come back to life.
2007-07-02 09:37:56 · answer #8 · answered by Toodeemo 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
no he should not be released. he should rot in that little tiny jail cell.
2007-07-02 09:09:38 · answer #9 · answered by Niki 2 · 5⤊ 0⤋
He should rot in hell!! The people that he hurt or killed do they have a choice?
2007-07-02 09:09:21 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋