Good thing it was in Canada... otherwise they probably would have given the guy two months probation and an offer to work with the Trump administration.
Good thing it was in Canada, or he may have had a gun.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
OTTAWA, Nov 16 (Reuters) - A 22-year-old self-confessed Canadian white nationalist who deliberately ran over and killed four members of a Muslim family in his truck in 2021 was found guilty of first degree murder on Thursday.
Prosecutors argued the attack was an act of terrorism, noting Veltman had written a manifesto entitled "A White Awakening" in which he outlined hatred of Islam and opposition to mass immigration and multiculturalism.
Five members of the Afzaal family, originally from Pakistan, were out for an evening walk in June 2021 when Veltman ran over them with his truck on the sidewalk.
It sets a precedent against white nationalist terrorism," said Abdul Fattah Twakkal, an imam at the London Muslim Mosque.
"The enduring grief, trauma and the irreplaceable void left by the loss of multiple generations has pierced us profoundly," Madiha Salman's mother Tabinda Bukhari told reporters.
Prosecutors said he also repeatedly watched the video of a mass shooting by a white supremacist in New Zealand which killed 51 people.
The original article contains 431 words, the summary contains 167 words. Saved 61%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
The jury took around six hours to convict Nathaniel Veltman, who attacked the family in the Ontario town of London. He faces life imprisonment with no chance of parole for 25 years.
This man ended four lives and orphaned a young boy, all out of irrational, racist hatred, and he may get to walk free at 47 years old. I oppose the death penalty only because human justice systems are shockingly bad at ensuring innocent people don't get convicted of crimes they didn't actually commit, but I very much believe in life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, and this douchebag definitely deserves it. I don't care if he reforms himself in prison, later regrets his actions, and plans to spend the rest of his free time at a charity for Muslim immigrants; he should never see sunlight again. Not only are four people dead because of his bigotry, many other lives have been scarred as a result. He does not deserve mercy nor a second chance. Morally, he doesn't even deserve to live out the rest of his life.
It really irks me that liberals are so reticent about punishing vile pieces of human waste like this. This is not fair, not just. So much hand-wringing about mercy and second chances for cold-blooded killers. When you have more empathy for criminals than their victims, your priorities are way out of whack. Shameful.
I think the mainstream liberal take is probably very aligned with yours. You have to go further left to get a different opinion. But I hold such an opinion so to give my perspective: I don't give 2 shits about punishment for punishments sake. If anything I only see that as causing more harm. What I care about is reducing net harm. There have been countless studies that have shown that severity of punishment is an extremely poor deterrent. Often times perpetrators are more concerned with the social impact getting caught will have on their immediate contacts over how long they'll be jailed for, and frankly, just don't think that they'll get caught at all. If we take that for true, and my goal of reducing net harm, the value of jail becomes reforming those who can be reformed, and keeping those who can't locked away from the rest of society. Neither of these things are intrinsically tied to any period of time. And because of how we treat ex-cons in society currently recidivism rates get worse for having been in prison. Possibly because they can't get legal work, and possibly because the social reputation damage has already been done, so that fear is no longer holding them back.
I don’t give 2 shits about punishment for punishments sake. If anything I only see that as causing more harm.
Yes, this is the standard view I get from a lot of liberals these days. Maybe you're right that most liberals are more aligned with me than you, but I've personally seen your views getting more popular with time, and I really don't like it.
Reason being, your view only takes into account the likelihood of future harm, but explicitly fails to address the harm already done. It's like you don't give a damn about the people criminals hurt, only their likelihood of hurting people in the future. Let's say this driver had merely been drunk, rather than racist, and he accidentally killed this family. In your view (and correct me if I'm wrong), he should only be incarcerated in a treatment facility for as long as it takes for his treatment providers to feel he is no longer a danger to society. Let's say this is the only time he's ever driven drunk, and its enough of a wake-up call for him that he's sober and remorseful within a year. That means he would be free and back to his life while the family of the people he killed are likely still mourning their deaths. Does that seem fair to you? According to you, it doesn't matter. Who cares? To me, that means you don't really give a damn about justice.
Like it or not, punishment is a part of justice. It's not about revenge—that's why we have punishments decided on and doled out by an impartial third party—it's about making someone who has made others suffer suffer themselves in some humane way, because if we don't, most people do not feel justice has been done. But you think we shouldn't even do that. This astonishes me. It makes me think you need to be the victim of a major crime, to be seriously hurt in some way by someone else, and then see them get a slap-on-the-wrist sentence, and see how it makes you feel.
I'm going to tell you right now that I've had this conversation with people like you many times over the years, and so I don't expect you're going to offer me any arguments that I haven't heard before. So, if I don't respond to your next comment, that's why. Just FYI.
I agree with you, but not sure how you can generalise the “liberal” position on that. I consider myself liberal and agree with everything you said
I probably should have said “some liberals.” My experience is that younger liberals tend to hold the view that punishment shouldn’t be a goal of criminal sentencing, only rehabilitation, which I adamantly disagree with. Obviously, such a view is mainly held by the Far Left, but from what I’ve seen it seems to be getting more popular and thus more mainstream. Just my impression; I’d be happy to learn I’m wrong and that those liberals are more in the minority than they seem to me.
Good thing it was in Canada... otherwise they probably would have given the guy two months probation and an offer to work with the Trump administration.
Good thing it was in Canada, or he may have had a gun.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
OTTAWA, Nov 16 (Reuters) - A 22-year-old self-confessed Canadian white nationalist who deliberately ran over and killed four members of a Muslim family in his truck in 2021 was found guilty of first degree murder on Thursday.
Prosecutors argued the attack was an act of terrorism, noting Veltman had written a manifesto entitled "A White Awakening" in which he outlined hatred of Islam and opposition to mass immigration and multiculturalism.
Five members of the Afzaal family, originally from Pakistan, were out for an evening walk in June 2021 when Veltman ran over them with his truck on the sidewalk.
It sets a precedent against white nationalist terrorism," said Abdul Fattah Twakkal, an imam at the London Muslim Mosque.
"The enduring grief, trauma and the irreplaceable void left by the loss of multiple generations has pierced us profoundly," Madiha Salman's mother Tabinda Bukhari told reporters.
Prosecutors said he also repeatedly watched the video of a mass shooting by a white supremacist in New Zealand which killed 51 people.
The original article contains 431 words, the summary contains 167 words. Saved 61%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
This man ended four lives and orphaned a young boy, all out of irrational, racist hatred, and he may get to walk free at 47 years old. I oppose the death penalty only because human justice systems are shockingly bad at ensuring innocent people don't get convicted of crimes they didn't actually commit, but I very much believe in life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, and this douchebag definitely deserves it. I don't care if he reforms himself in prison, later regrets his actions, and plans to spend the rest of his free time at a charity for Muslim immigrants; he should never see sunlight again. Not only are four people dead because of his bigotry, many other lives have been scarred as a result. He does not deserve mercy nor a second chance. Morally, he doesn't even deserve to live out the rest of his life.
It really irks me that liberals are so reticent about punishing vile pieces of human waste like this. This is not fair, not just. So much hand-wringing about mercy and second chances for cold-blooded killers. When you have more empathy for criminals than their victims, your priorities are way out of whack. Shameful.
I think the mainstream liberal take is probably very aligned with yours. You have to go further left to get a different opinion. But I hold such an opinion so to give my perspective: I don't give 2 shits about punishment for punishments sake. If anything I only see that as causing more harm. What I care about is reducing net harm. There have been countless studies that have shown that severity of punishment is an extremely poor deterrent. Often times perpetrators are more concerned with the social impact getting caught will have on their immediate contacts over how long they'll be jailed for, and frankly, just don't think that they'll get caught at all. If we take that for true, and my goal of reducing net harm, the value of jail becomes reforming those who can be reformed, and keeping those who can't locked away from the rest of society. Neither of these things are intrinsically tied to any period of time. And because of how we treat ex-cons in society currently recidivism rates get worse for having been in prison. Possibly because they can't get legal work, and possibly because the social reputation damage has already been done, so that fear is no longer holding them back.
Yes, this is the standard view I get from a lot of liberals these days. Maybe you're right that most liberals are more aligned with me than you, but I've personally seen your views getting more popular with time, and I really don't like it.
Reason being, your view only takes into account the likelihood of future harm, but explicitly fails to address the harm already done. It's like you don't give a damn about the people criminals hurt, only their likelihood of hurting people in the future. Let's say this driver had merely been drunk, rather than racist, and he accidentally killed this family. In your view (and correct me if I'm wrong), he should only be incarcerated in a treatment facility for as long as it takes for his treatment providers to feel he is no longer a danger to society. Let's say this is the only time he's ever driven drunk, and its enough of a wake-up call for him that he's sober and remorseful within a year. That means he would be free and back to his life while the family of the people he killed are likely still mourning their deaths. Does that seem fair to you? According to you, it doesn't matter. Who cares? To me, that means you don't really give a damn about justice.
Like it or not, punishment is a part of justice. It's not about revenge—that's why we have punishments decided on and doled out by an impartial third party—it's about making someone who has made others suffer suffer themselves in some humane way, because if we don't, most people do not feel justice has been done. But you think we shouldn't even do that. This astonishes me. It makes me think you need to be the victim of a major crime, to be seriously hurt in some way by someone else, and then see them get a slap-on-the-wrist sentence, and see how it makes you feel.
I'm going to tell you right now that I've had this conversation with people like you many times over the years, and so I don't expect you're going to offer me any arguments that I haven't heard before. So, if I don't respond to your next comment, that's why. Just FYI.
I agree with you, but not sure how you can generalise the “liberal” position on that. I consider myself liberal and agree with everything you said
I probably should have said “some liberals.” My experience is that younger liberals tend to hold the view that punishment shouldn’t be a goal of criminal sentencing, only rehabilitation, which I adamantly disagree with. Obviously, such a view is mainly held by the Far Left, but from what I’ve seen it seems to be getting more popular and thus more mainstream. Just my impression; I’d be happy to learn I’m wrong and that those liberals are more in the minority than they seem to me.