Charles Manson: where's the victim?

[KDus]

I was stunned to hear Ian deviate from a principled position. Thanks to Ally for being consistent.

Manson didn't kill anyone. The people he influenced might be able to make the case that they are his victims but that would be a civil matter.

Ian was willing to get on the slippery slope with a comment like, "it would be socially irresponsible to let him be free."

[Fred]

Great - let him out to come and live at your house.

[Turd Ferguson]

I think Ian's thing is, he has a swastika stamped into his forehead and he's a demonstratively fucked up evil type dude.

[BonerJoe]

Put him on display. I'd pay $20.

[Turd Ferguson]

Dunking machine, filled with vomit...... porcfest......10 bucks a ball.

[Disengage]

Manson is definitely crazy, probably still dangerous, and certainly guilty.  Probably of murder.

I'm not all that familiar with the details, honestly, but I know he didn't actually kill anyone.  The question then becomes, did he brainwash his "family" and use psychological force to get them to kill for him?      My understanding is that he did.     

If I brainwash someone and they kill for me, then the argument can be made that they had no choice in the matter and that, at the time of the murder, they were just a tool.  They were the "gun" that I used to kill another person.    So the extent to which Manson took away their free will is the same extent to which he is guilty of murder.   

However, it isn't quite as easy as that.  I imagine there is some uncertainty as to how much control these people had over themselves both before and during the crimes.

[Sovereign Curtis]

Everything else aside, Manson is now a political prisoner and he KNOWS his parole hearings are a joke, and just an excuse to get him on camera acting crazy, so he gives them what they want.

[Turd Ferguson]

Why would he want to give them what they want? Was he a born entertainer maybe?

[Robin]

Everything else aside, Manson is now a political prisoner and he KNOWS his parole hearings are a joke, and just an excuse to get him on camera acting crazy, so he gives them what they want.

I've agreed with the political prisoner thing since I was old enough to wrap my head around all the things I researched about him and the family. I think he did want to be an entertainer, he recorded at Brian Wilson's house. The Beach Boys even released a Manson song that they reworked into "Never Learn Not To Love". I doubt he would have a chance to be dangerous if they were to let him out today, he would most likely be murdered within his first 48 hours out of prison. 

[John Shaw]

What Manson did was morally almost identical to hiring a group of assassins.

Slightly worse in the sense that he manipulated and headfucked people into doing it rather than just offering someone cash.

Did he do it? Nope. Would it have happened if not for him? Nope.

[Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith)]

What Manson did was morally almost identical to hiring a group of assassins.

Slightly worse in the sense that he manipulated and headfucked people into doing it rather than just offering someone cash.

Did he do it? Nope. Would it have happened if not for him? Nope.

He used individuals as tools to commit murder.  Guilty.

[John Shaw]

He used individuals as tools to commit murder.  Guilty.

That's kinda what I'm sayin, yeah.

[KDus]

So, the people that did the killing were just following orders?

So, Manson is guilty because of someone else's actions?

[dalebert]

What Manson did was morally almost identical to hiring a group of assassins.

Slightly worse in the sense that he manipulated and headfucked people into doing it rather than just offering someone cash.

Exactly. In fact, I would actually say that IS what he did. He just didn't use money as his incentive.

[John Shaw]

What Manson did was morally almost identical to hiring a group of assassins.

Slightly worse in the sense that he manipulated and headfucked people into doing it rather than just offering someone cash.

Exactly. In fact, I would actually say that IS what he did. He just didn't use money as his incentive.

Yeah I never understood how anyone could even say that there's a controversy about this.

Dude offered a reward of sorts for their death, dude was the one with the idea of killing them, if dude hadn't thought it up or laid out the general plans or made the offer/request of his followers it would have never happened. He is responsible for their deaths just like he hired hit men/women.

If I set up bear traps in front of someone with or even without the intention of hurting someone and they get hurt I am responsible. If I set crazy human traps up in front of someone for the same purpose it's the same thing.