Viewpoints writers

Opinion Grab Bag: Columnists debate whether Arizona shooter should receive more lenient sentence because of possible mental illness

It is a tragedy of the greatest degree that Mr. Loughner, fueled by psychological disturbances, chose to take the lives of innocent people in such a brutal manner. Like all people who suffer mentally in any capacity, he deserves psychological treatment. His legal punishment, however, is separate from this need for treatment. In a legal sense, a defendant's mental illness is only relevant when it prevents him or her from understanding the consequences of his or her actions and recognizing them as right or wrong. As of yet, there is little publicized evidence that Mr. Loughner was incapable of such fundamental cognitive abilities. Therefore, the verdict in his court case should only consider the evidence pertaining to his guilt or innocence. While it is not irrelevant in understanding Mr. Loughner's actions, we must remember that it was his finger that pulled the trigger, not his mental state. — Brooke McAbeeThird-year English student