Boston Bombing aftermath, any similarity to the Lincoln assassination aftermath?

[Laurie Verge]

Jenny, I think you have made some very valid points here in trying to imagine what the underlying causes of Booth's act might have been. I agree that you cannot compare his actions during a time of civil war, political and social upheaval, etc. with those of history's serial killers. To me, their motivations are like the proverbial apples and oranges.

I have sat back and watched this discussion and stayed quiet (which is very unusual for me!). I just have one thought running through my head, and I know that I will catch flak for it: Osama bin Laden was responsible for the deaths of thousands of people (not just on 9/11 and not just Americans). Politics aside, was it okay for Barack Obama to give the order to have him killed by our Navy Seals?

Did that order make Obama and the Seal who fired the shot assassins? Criminally insane? What? Or, could we just say that it was a perceived patriotic example of a government leader (like Jefferson Davis) giving authorization to an agent (Booth) to do what needed to be done?

Chaotic times create strange occurrences, and I don't think any of us have the power to truly put ourselves in our forefathers' shoes and understand what motivated them during such unusual times.

[Gene C]

I'd answer that Laurie, but these dialogue boxes are to small.

[L Verge]

I guess I'm glad that they are too small!!??!!?

[My Name Is Kate]

No one was comparing JWB's act with Ted Bundy's acts. I was talking about taking responsibility for one's actions. To his credit, I think JWB would be insulted by anyone suggesting that his action was in any way caused by mental illness. Not so sure about Bundy. But even if the criminal (Bundy) doesn't try to shirk responsibility, there are those "bleeding hearts" who will attempt to do it for them.

BTW, I'm not necessarily saying Booth was a criminal, at least not in the usual sense, because I do think that the circumstances surrounding his action, i.e., the Civil War, make his a special case.

[L Verge]

Thanks, Kate #2, for that last sentence.

[DanielC]

(05-21-2013 06:12 PM)My Name Is Kate Wrote:  No one was comparing JWB's act with Ted Bundy's acts. I was talking about taking responsibility for one's actions. To his credit, I think JWB would be insulted by anyone suggesting that his action was in any way caused by mental illness. Not so sure about Bundy. But even if the criminal (Bundy) doesn't try to shirk responsibility, there are those "bleeding hearts" who will attempt to do it for them.

BTW, I'm not necessarily saying Booth was a criminal, at least not in the usual sense, because I do think that the circumstances surrounding his action, i.e., the Civil War, make his a special case.

Booth- Was not a criminal?

[My Name Is Kate]

I have not formed a set opinion on that...yet. My feeling (without much thought behind it, because the subject is too huge for me to wrap my head around, at this point) is that all acts of human beings killing one another (except in self-defense) are criminal.

[L Verge]

With few exceptions, I don't think anyone on this forum would deny that Booth was a criminal. To me, it's the motivation behind his act and the setting in time that makes his deed unique.

[My Name Is Kate]

Yes. I hesitated in calling Booth a criminal because I feel that if he is so labeled, then alot of other people would also have to be labeled criminals, depending on whose perspective we are considering. Nevertheless, I do believe in absolute right and wrong, but we (or at least, I) am not talking about absolutes at the moment.

Quote:*shrug* If that's how you want to look at it, that's okay with me. It's your opinion, just as I have mine. Smile

I don't see that we disagree on any major point. Booth may have been mentally ill, and that may have made him more susceptible to doing what he did. I was just trying to head off any possible consideration of him not being responsible for his actions.

[Eva Elisabeth]

(05-21-2013 06:59 PM)L Verge Wrote:  With few exceptions, I don't think anyone on this forum would deny that Booth was a criminal. To me, it's the motivation behind his act and the setting in time that makes his deed unique.

Would you really call it unique? I always felt reminded to Caesar's assassination or other famous cases.

[Eva Elisabeth]

Sometimes, the boundary between reasoning and excusing seems vague. To reason or cause criminal actions with "criminal insanity" IMO is legitimate, but if the consequence is that those "insanes" are prosecuted less strict (or virtually not at all) than the "non-insanes" because they "are not responsible", it is misused as an excuse. (I'm not focussing on punishment, but on protecting society and preventing future victims.)
I think people need reasons, at best comprehensible ones, and also names to label them, in order to deal with uncommon, shocking human behaviour. It is easier to deal with the reason "he did it for the benefit of his country" than "he did it for his personal ego". And it is still easier to deal with "criminal insanity" than with the latter.

If you agreed in that JWB's main considerable motives were to act for the benefit of "his" confederency and/or to meet and satisfy his internal, inner needs, which of these motives would you consider the leading one? Or were they balanced? Or was the first one ("benefit for Conf.") a pretended "outward" excuse to justify his internal second one to the people or even to himself?

---

I hope you'll understand what I mean, I'm not sure if my English is goood enough to put it into the right, accurate words

[RJNorton]

Good morning, Eva (please excuse...I believe it's afternoon where you live). Your post is complex and difficult to answer completely, but I am going to put in a plug for forum member Bill Richter's book entitled Sic Semper Tyrannis. Bill's book really helps us to have a much better understanding of Booth and his mindset. If I were still teaching, and were trying to give the students a more comprehensive perspective of the driving forces in Booth's mind, I would use Bill's book as a resource for this. I certainly recommend it. It could lead to a great class discussion in which the students compare/contrast Bill's book to what they are reading in their own textbook. Eva, I really think Bill's book goes a long way in answering your post.

[Jenny]

Quote:I don't see that we disagree on any major point. Booth may have been mentally ill, and that may have made him more susceptible to doing what he did. I was just trying to head off any possible consideration of him not being responsible for his actions.

Looking back, I agree - I don't think we disagree on any major point at all. So forget that post.