Sponsored by

Comments on

Loughner: 'I plead guilty,' will be sentenced to 7 life terms

Jared Loughner pleaded guilty Tuesday to 19 counts in the Jan. 8, 2011 shooting, under a plea agreement that will send him to prison for life.  “I plead guilty,” Loughner repeated slowly as the judge questioned him on each count.... Read more»

have your say   

3 comments on this story

1
1153 comments
Aug 7, 2012, 4:48 pm
-0 +1

Pietz testified Tuesday that Loughner was not able to stand trial, mainly because of antipsychotic medications he’s received in a federal prison hospital.

This makes zero sense. How in the hell can he be competent enough to enter a plea, but not competent enough to stand trial. I don’t think Pietz should be able to have it both ways. But if you want to talk about “should”, the mental-health card shouldn’t be played in criminal court, especially true in this case. “Bitch died in front of me”. Sound familiar? Look at the smiles in his mug shots…

I don’t think justice is served here. There are some crimes so heinous and so senseless that death is really the only option we have that complies with the Eighth Amendment. Life without parole just seems so insufficient. Even if it’s in prison, why should he get to live when six others did not, and a seventh will never be the same again? Though his life won’t be ideal, it will be a life…more than six of his victims got, and probably better than one of his survivors.

The Sentinel wins another local reporting contest. Though they didn’t get the story out first, the Sentinel’s piece was far more informative, detailed, and lucid then that of its competitors. Offering a copy of the plea agreement was just icing on the cake, and very much appreciated. Good work Dylan. This goes to show that, in journalism, being first out with the story doesn’t necessarily equate to being the best.

2
325 comments
Aug 7, 2012, 5:05 pm
-0 +0

@Bret Linden

Thanks for finding that typo, Bret ; )

3
1153 comments
Aug 8, 2012, 7:48 am
-0 +0

@Dylan Smith

Well, when I typed what I typed, I didn’t think it was a typo. I just took it at face value. You were there, the rest of the piece was so good, and that quote didn’t sound any dumber than anything else that quack has spewed since this whole thing began.

Sorry, we missed your input...

You must be logged in or register to comment

Categories

news, politics & government, crime, family/life, local, arizona, breaking
Sponsored by

Top Commenters

  • Bret Linden: 1153
  • Dylan Smith: 325
  • Roberto De Vido: 267
  • buddhaboy: 209
  • Quietwoman2: 172
  • Brittanicus: 143
  • Joan: 86
  • scar: 82
  • janamg: 72
  • azjimn2son: 63
Sponsored by

User Guidelines

Please be respectful and relevant. Thought-provoking. Or at least funny.

We want comments to advance the discussion and we need your help. Debate, disagree, yell (digitally) or laugh, but do it with respect.

We won't censor your comments if we don't agree with you; we want viewpoints from across the political spectrum. We're dedicated to sparking an open, active discussion. We believe people with differing opinions can spark debate and effect change.

Comments are open to registered users of TucsonSentinel.com.

Keep in mind:

  • A conversation involves sharing and respect. Support your viewpoint with facts, not attacks.
  • Ask questions. Search out answers.
  • Remember that being part of a community requires tolerance for differing views.
  • We can't ensure that all comments are based in truth. The only comments we endorse are those we write ourselves.

TucsonSentinel.com does not allow:

  • Hate speech. Blatantly racist, sexist or homophobic slurs or calls for violence against a particular type of person, etc. will be removed.
  • Obscenity & excessive cursing. Sometimes a well-placed curse word - if you're creative enough to get it past our auto-censor - can express your point in just the right way. But we say '%*$& no' to cursing for cursing's sake. And lose the explicit sexually-descriptive language. It doesn't contribute to the debate and there are plenty of other places on the Internet to find it.
  • Flaming. During a heated discussion, unkind words may be spoken. We can live with a certain amount of rudeness in the name of provocative conversation, but a pattern of personal attacks (name-calling, mocking, or baiting) is not acceptable nor are threatening or harassing comments. Show some respect, please.
  • Spam. Solicitation of products or services isn't allowed; contact us about advertising, we'd love to talk to you. Links to off-topic sites may be deleted.
  • Copyright or IP infringement. Lengthy quotes and violations of 'Fair Use' aren't allowed. Anything you post should be your own work.
  • Overposting. Don't bore people and waste electrons with identical comments on multiple stories or repetitive comments that don't advance a conversation.
  • Trolling, sockpuppetry, and other abusive behavior. Please don't feed the trolls and don't pretend to be someone you're not.
  • Gossip. Don't bring up others who can't defend themselves. We don't give out personal information; you shouldn't either.

Comments that violate these guidelines may be removed. We reserve the right to make up the rules as we go along.

Flagging

Commentors are solely responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. Users who violate these standards may lose their privileges on TucsonSentinel.com.

Sentinel editors can't read every comment. Trolls, spammers and other troublemakers can slide under the bridge. We rely on you to help maintain a healthy conversation - more than likely, you're reading these comments before the editors.

What if you see something inappropriate? Use the 'Flag' button to send it to a moderation queue. Help us out and tell us why you're reporting it; please don't report someone just because you disagree with them. Boy who cried wolf and all that. We'll take appropriate action on violations.

We will not edit comments to alter their meaning or censor comments because of political content.

We will not remove comments solely because they are heartless, cruel, coarse, foolish or just plain wrong. Your disapproval can maintain a decent signal to noise ratio. Ultimately, however, self-policing is the best method.

Bottom line, don't be a jerk.

  • A
  • A
  • A
  •   Share:
  • more»
Show previews