http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/newsbursts/0,7407,2705715,00.html

Site sues to Webcast McVeigh execution

TAMPA, Fla.--A Florida operator of peek-a-boo Web sites is pushing to secure rights to Web cast the execution of convicted U.S. mass murderer Timothy McVeigh. Best known for Voyeurdorm.com and Dudedorm.com, adults-only subscription Web sites carrying live video from the college homes of women and men, Entertainment Network of Tampa said on Friday it had filed suit against the U.S. government seeking permission to Web cast the execution.

The company said in a statement that prison officials had refused to let Entertainment Network put a Web camera in the death chamber at a federal prison in Terre Haute, Ind., where McVeigh is to be put to death on May 16.

Entertainment Network said the government was acting unconstitutionally in blocking the Web cast and that it was seeking restraining orders and injunctions against the prison's warden, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and the head of the federal prison system. --Reuters

---------------------

The days of building a scaffold in the town square and hanging the outlaws for all to see are long gone. I'm curious to learn when and why executions became hidden from public view. (Anybody know?) Seems to me that if execution is argued as "justified" because it is a deterent to crime, it would be even more effective as a deterent if the actual executions were held publicly. As it stands now, it almost takes on the appearance of a dirty little secret which the State is "ashamed" of.

-- CD (costavike@hotmail.com), April 07, 2001

Answers

CD, I agree with your comments. And I'm sure in the dark recesses of my mind, I'd like to take a "peek", but I really don't think I need to see this and consequently, I seriously doubt I'd "tune in".

I guess I understand others' need/desire to see it, but it's just not for me.

Of course, I don't know if anyone has the right to deny broadcast/publication of it..... And I certainly don't have the right to deny anyone who wants to see it.....

Too much of a gray area I suppose.

Could I be any more wishy-washy?!?!?!

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), April 07, 2001.

Well, I haven't heard anything about the web site law suit, but it seems Ashcroft has agreed to a closed-circuit broadcast for families of the victims.

Ashcroft Allows Execution Telecast

I still don't think it's something I need to see, but I didn't lose a loved one to this maniac.

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), April 11, 2001.

Do you think J will be included in the transmission pool. It would be cruel for him not to be able to see the last few moments of his hero's life.

-- Jack Booted Thug (governmentconspiracy@NWO.com), April 12, 2001.

I think Ashcroft's allowing of the closed circuit broadcast is the right decision. I have no doubt that if I were family or friend to one of McVeigh's victims I would receive a certain satisfaction in watching his execution.

-- CD (costavike@hotmail.com), April 12, 2001.

There should be a national lottery held. Winners each get to throw a pingpong ball-sized rock at a chained McVeigh from ten feet away, one at a time, until he's dead. The rocks could then be auctioned, with the proceeds going to the families of the victims.

A strategy session should be held prior to the stoning so that maximum torture of McVeigh can be planned by the participants. Striking vital areas of his body should be avoided. Better to keep him alive and suffering, right? Smelling salts should be employed as well.

The murder of McVeigh would be broadcast pay-per-view. Sales of the death by stoning video would generate additional income for the victims' families.

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), April 12, 2001.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Giving potential domestic terrorists a martyr is a mistake.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), April 12, 2001.

Wow, Rich. So I take it you've given up on the "death by fire-ants" idea?

I think I'd tend to agree with you on that, Tarzan. There will be those who will consider McVeigh a hero who went out in a blaze of glory. Perhaps in this instance it would be better to let him rot in a cell.

-- CD (costavike@hotmail.com), April 12, 2001.

That's what I had thought, too, CD and Tarzan. After all, isn't it so much worse a punishment to rot for the rest of your natural years behind bars?

At least they didn't set the execution date as April 19. I suppose we should be grateful.

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), April 12, 2001.

I've stated this before and I'll do so again: execution is murder. If our government sanctions the murder of its citizens for infractions of the law, then it might as well carry it out using crude, barbarous methods. But then electrocution is just that, isn't it.

Execution by governmental decree should not be undertaken privately. There's nothing more egregious an act than the taking of a life. The government owes its citizenry the opportunity to view the enforcement of a punishment which is final and irrevocable. For it is the public which gives the power over life and death to its government. We should have the choice to experience the results of such an important decision.

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), April 12, 2001.

There's talk of including a "Life in prison with no parole" option in the Texas legislature right now. I'm not sure if it's part of or separate from the Ellis Bill that Bush vetoed as governor 2 years ago. Ellis was more involved with ensuring that the accused received proper counsel at the trial. If "Life in prison with no parole" passes, it will be interesting to see if Texas juries opt for that one more or less often than execution. The last time I checked, Florida had BOTH, but still had one of the highest execution levels in the U.S.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), April 12, 2001.