If a man killed 64 people on 64 different occasions before finally being apprehended by the authorities and once he was caught he claimed how much pleasure each death gave him, should his children be sentenced to death along with him if they've lived their entire life with him?
2007-10-27 00:41:55 · 13 answers · asked by James B 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
For those that "can't understand the question"
the reason for this question was simple: If a man has killed that many people and enjoyed himself he is inherently evil. It seems likely that his children may carry some of the same traits. An adult with a tendency to let his/her temper get the better of them is likely to have a child with similar tendencies.
Furthermore, if this inherently evil man was responsible for instilling the moral fiber through which his kids would judge the world isn't it likely that he would have tought them a similar way to deal with, what he would perceive to be, "wrongdoers?"
2007-10-27 02:01:11 · update #1
I just wanted to see what people thought.
This is a fine example of groupthink.
Last night at a dinner party this question evolved over a lengthy session of wine drinking. Everyone last night seemed to think the lineage of that man should be terminated or they should be isolated from society completely.
Today everyone is on the "no" train...
strange
2007-10-27 02:06:21 · update #2
Are you a carbon copy of your father if you lived with him for a proportion of your life? If your father was a child abuser would you 100% become one? If your father beat you would you then beat your own children? I expect many people would answer 'no'. I expect many people would say that the children in the situation you state were victims too and would need therapy to help them deal with their treatment by their father, and to help them challenge any internalized beliefs they took from him.
2007-10-27 00:54:05 · answer #1 · answered by Gone Crazy 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Evil is as Evil does ......
Ya just can't punish the gene pool for one mutant ... ... ... ...
But, yes there was such a man ..... and he was a functioning killer for over twenty years ...... we found parts of the bodies ..... and still had a few parts in storage.
But he never stood trial for even one of the sixty some odd victims ..... he was already in jail and dying from a terminal decease.
So was justice done ..... did he pay for the crimes committed ...... since all the victims could not be identified, the families were never notified. All the bodies & parts were never recovered ....... could it have been a huge twisted story to get attention ........
Always hold the one responsible for the deeds & actions ...... make the accountability swift and decisive. With out it ... there can be no deterant.
2007-10-27 08:23:10 · answer #2 · answered by John 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that question does not even make sense. if they did not actively participate in the deaths... or new and remained silent.. why would they have to share the blame. are u trying to delve into whether present generations are responsible for the evil deads of ancestors.?
2007-10-27 07:47:03 · answer #3 · answered by foosieboy1953 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No Why Should they they havent commited any crimes they just lived with him, to be honest they would be most vulnerable so should get put into care or go and live with a distant relative not sentenced to prison.
2007-10-27 07:45:08 · answer #4 · answered by martin_rocks_masson 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. That's called "collective punishment", and unless those kids helped him commit the murders or helped him to escape, etc., knowing that he was a murderer, then killing them is just killing the innocent, and that is called... "murder".
2007-10-27 07:45:46 · answer #5 · answered by Paul Hxyz 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, but they should be in some sort of therapy. Parents don't pass everything onto their children.
2007-10-27 07:45:00 · answer #6 · answered by bezsenný 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not unless they knew about the deaths and participated in the crimes with him.
2007-10-27 07:46:40 · answer #7 · answered by Cindy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
only if they helped but if they knew and didn't help they shouldn't because they don't control their fathers action and it would be unfair to the kids.
2007-10-27 07:50:01 · answer #8 · answered by little lauren 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is morbid.
Why should his kids get punishment unless they knew he was killing people?
2007-10-27 07:44:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
to me thats a weird thought-what the h--l would his kids have to do with anything
2007-10-27 07:46:01 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋