Abortion sniper asks for mercy in federal trial:

[Praxius]

In court Tuesday, Kopp asked for mercy from the jury and said he respected the Slepian family, calling the shooting death a "tragedy," as he had merely intended to wound Slepian so the obstetrician could no longer perform abortions.

Abortion sniper asks for mercy in federal trial

He asked for mercy? Why should he get mercy? He attacked a person with a firearm and knew the damage it would do. Weither or not he intended to kill him or wound him is irrelevant in my opinion.

If he wounded him or if he killed him, he altered the lives of his family and friends and intended to do harm. Why should he get mercy for his actions? He broke the law, he planned his attack, he killed a man based on the job he does.

Anywho.... Opinions?

[The Dunedan]

Absolutely, and I say this as a Pro-Lifer. What he did was murder, pure and simple. You take a shot at somebody, you'd better be ready to kill 'em, and do time if needed. This asshole either tried for an apalling publicity stunt, or concocted a rediculous lie in a transparent attempt to cover up a First Degree Murder. Either way, he needs to go to Angola, or some equally-unpleasant place, for the rest of his life. You cannot claim to be Pro-Life and engage in Murder or (at -absolute- best, Negligent Homicide). Period. If you insist upon having a State, one of its' functions must be to punish and isolate persons of this sort from the rest of society.

[Praxius]

Quote by: The Dunedan Absolutely, and I say this as a Pro-Lifer. What he did was murder, pure and simple. You take a shot at somebody, you'd better be ready to kill 'em, and do time if needed. This asshole either tried for an apalling publicity stunt, or concocted a rediculous lie in a transparent attempt to cover up a First Degree Murder. Either way, he needs to go to Angola, or some equally-unpleasant place, for the rest of his life. You cannot claim to be Pro-Life and engage in Murder or (at -absolute- best, Negligent Homicide). Period. If you insist upon having a State, one of its' functions must be to punish and isolate persons of this sort from the rest of society.

I'm not pro life..... exactly, I feel abortions are necessary in "Some" situations, but for those who are against it are not going to help their cause if they act with murder and assault and just prove to be hypocritical.

If they want to be pro life.... then they should adhere to all life.

[Kamehameha34]

These "moral highhorse" idiots claim that anyone who disagrees with their subjective view should be shot. These are the kind of people that I want the government to incarcerate.

[abub]

well this is entertaining.

mr. kopp probably thinks that abortion is murder. so how did he go about attempting to stop the murder? by murdering, of course!

[The Bacon Guy]

Quote by: Praxius He asked for mercy? Why should he get mercy? He attacked a person with a firearm and knew the damage it would do. Weither or not he intended to kill him or wound him is irrelevant in my opinion.

I don’t necessarily agree with your point about punishing the outcome rather than the intent, but I think his sentence was necessary. If he is willing to shoot someone for a political agenda, he is clearly a danger to society. Also, any lenience in his sentencing could encourage other prospective terrorists. He had to be sentenced harshly.

[Jack]

He begged for mercy because he, like so many who have no problem inflicting pain and suffering on others, is a coward afraid to answer for his own actions.

[Scribbler1]

Well said. People are pretty tough when they aren't on the receiving end.

[RickSp]

He deserves exactly the mercy that he showed to Dr. Slepian.

It is possible that the killing of Slepian was not Kopp's only crime. The FBI notes "(t)he shooting was similar to shootings in Rochester, New York, and three Canadian cities during the fall of 1997, in which abortion doctors were shot in their homes."[2] Kopp has been charged by Canadian authorities in the 1995 shooting of Ontario doctor Hugh Short, one of a string of Remembrance Day shootings.

James Charles Kopp

[Praxius]

Quote by: The Bacon Guy I don’t necessarily agree with your point about punishing the outcome rather than the intent, but I think his sentence was necessary. If he is willing to shoot someone for a political agenda, he is clearly a danger to society. Also, any lenience in his sentencing could encourage other prospective terrorists. He had to be sentenced harshly.

Well that's basically what I meant. I'm not totally geared for punishing for the outcome over the intent, but the final outcome is what happened and when I was taught law, "Ignorance is not an excuse" and he seems to be trying to claim along these lines aka: "I didn't mean for that to happen, so let me off easy."

Both Shooting someone with the intent to injure and shooting to kill are both serious crimes, but to me it sounds like he's trying to downplay it as an accident, so he doesn't end up in jail for longer.... which to me is BS.

mr. kopp probably thinks that abortion is murder. so how did he go about attempting to stop the murder? by murdering, of course!

Exactly... I remember when all this first came out, the defense was that in order to save all the lives of these babies up for abortions, you kill one life for many. This was some extremist's reasoning for killing abortion doctors.

The thing is.... terrorizing the doctors and killing them isn't going to stop the future parents in going to some other doctor or other location to get it done.

[Osborn F Enready]

“Orwell was not wrong when he said of Western Marxists that if it paid better they'd be fascists. The chimera of absolute power has a certain hold on utopians, who claim they need to be devils to do the work of angels.”
-Victor David Hanson, 2004-Mar-31, "Question Log"

I couldn't think of a more appropriate quote for this bastard who has the NERVE to ask for mercy.....

He most certainly was, and is, a fascist.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Social change has always been brought about by violence. The founding fathers themselves started an illegal war.

The guy got caught, he is going to pay the price, as he should, but morally he is no worse than the abortionist he killed.

[Praxius]

Quote by: Flea_Bit_Monkey The guy got caught, he is going to pay the price, as he should, but morally he is no worse than the abortionist he killed.

Ummmm..... who wants to take this one?

[Scribbler1]

I'm not touching it. It'll get the thread moved to Philosophy & Religion pretty quick. You just can't argue with that mindset.

[pandaz xx]

Keep me away from it. I'm with scribbler on this one.

[Praxius]

Lol... sorry flea, but apparently your comment is not worth replying to.

I've already gotten into debates over this morality and people from your spectrum of understanding don't seem to "get it." ~ So I'm just gonna leave it at that, since there's a thread in regards to the morality of abortions already.

This is geared towards murder of abortionists. Perhaps the morality of abortions and abortionists go hand in hand in some mind's, but not for me.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Quote by: Praxius Lol... sorry flea, but apparently your comment is not worth replying to.

Actually I read the reluctance of replying to my post as being due to unwillingness to tackle the morality of the issue, rather than my post having no worth.

The abortion doctor was a killer, he killed lots of human beings by choice. As far as I can tell, morally he got his just desserts when he was killed.

[Praxius]

Quote by: Flea_Bit_Monkey The abortion doctor was a killer, he killed lots of human beings by choice. As far as I can tell, morally he got his just desserts when he was killed.

Ah, but that's you dictating your personal opinion on abortions and if fetusesezezez..... are considered alive, prior to being born.

The laws in the country say that abortions are allowed and legal, the doctors are performing a ligit operation and is accepted by law...... shooting the doctor is against the law, so weither or not you feel it's morally wrong, it is legally wrong.

Not everybody agrees with your side of the debate, so to go out and force death apon someone because you disagree with what they do is extreme and works against your cause.

The thing I don't understand is where do these "Pro-Life" extremist feel they have the right to decide what people do with their families and jobs.

They go out and shoot the doctor, when it's the potential mother and father who have made the decision and are there to get the abortion. But instead of shooting the people making the decision, they shoot the person who's just doing a part of his job.

[DavidShankle]

Well... allow me to be devil's advocate. But let's say that his intention was to prevent the doctor from murdering a child. Even if his purpose was to kill the doctor, it would not contradict his pro-life stance, because self-defense is perfectly acceptable to most pro-lifers. For instance... if someone comes at you or another person with a loaded gun, shooting to kill that person would not be murder. It would be self-defense (even if you were protecting another rather than yourself). So, that being said, from his point of view that abortion is murder, his shooting of the doctor would not be murder at all, but rather fully justified self-defense of the child.

So.... I'm not saying that what he did was legal, but that his position is not hypocritical at all. Good good ol' fashioned self-defense.

[Praxius]

Quote by: DavidShankle Well... allow me to be devil's advocate. But let's say that his intention was to prevent the doctor from murdering a child. Even if his purpose was to kill the doctor, it would not contradict his pro-life stance, because self-defense is perfectly acceptable to most pro-lifers. For instance... if someone comes at you or another person with a loaded gun, shooting to kill that person would not be murder. It would be self-defense (even if you were protecting another rather than yourself). So, that being said, from his point of view that abortion is murder, his shooting of the doctor would not be murder at all, but rather fully justified self-defense of the child. So.... I'm not saying that what he did was legal, but that his position is not hypocritical at all. Good good ol' fashioned self-defense.

I see..... but the doctor is currently alive. The parents are currently alive.... the parents decided to abort the fetus, therefore the parents are responsible for the so-called death of the unborn baby.

It's a defense for a life that hasn't begun to live yet, imo.

If you plan on killing the doctor, then wouldn't it be logical to kill the parents as well?