Why no talk of death penalty for Penn State?

[HuskyFan16]

I'm always amazed at the thinking of people that, if the penalty is severe enough, it will prevent the crime from happening again in the future. If that were, indeed, the case, there would be no crime committed anywhere. While you can make the case that capital punishment against a murderer prevents THAT murderer from killing again, you simply cannot make the claim that NO murders will ever occur again.

The issue here is not with Penn State University. It is with the human beings that had such callous disregard for doing what is right, moral, and ethical. THOSE should be the focus of punishment, and I trust, will spend the future with less money AND behind bars.

My point is not that punishing Penn State will serve as the be all and end all example to wrongful organizations, its just that Penn State plainly deserves that harsh of a penalty. And BL starting from a point of "there always has to be a difference between..." doesn't allow for judgement between different situations. The Penn State athletic department is a completely different public institution than FEMA. And I would argue that punishments for publicly owned organizations should be harsher in nature anyway since they are supposed to be functioning on behalf and are paid for by the people.

 

[businesslawyer]

Biz, I understand your point, but let's not lose sight of the fact that these football programs and athletic departments are acting every bit the part of for-profit organizations - the very worst of them.

Taking the whole institution down is crazy imo. But, if I were PSU I would shelve this football season in the hopes of bringing about meaningful change in the athletic department that could be demonstrated to the public.

That's the point. The football programs/athletic departments are acting like monopolists. Yes. I agree. Bring them down. I'm not telling you that the death penalty isn't appropriate for the football program.

But Penn State University is a non-profit institution that serves a critical non-profit need for the citizens of Pennsylvania. You can not (at least not rationally) shut it down. And cutting off federal student aid to attendees would do that.

 

[UCFBfan]

And since when do universities (or anyone else) get punished before they've had their chance to defend themselves?

This is a serious question. I know it was a different time and legal stuff was handled differently but was SMU given the chance to defend itself against the death penalty and did they challenge it? Was just curious about this.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[businesslawyer]

My point is not that punishing Penn State will serve as the be all and end all example to wrongful organizations, its just that Penn State plainly deserves that harsh of a penalty. And BL starting from a point of "there always has to be a difference between..." doesn't allow for judgement between different situations. The Penn State athletic department is a completely different public institution than FEMA. And I would argue that punishments for publicly owned organizations should be harsher in nature anyway since they are supposed to be functioning on behalf and are paid for by the people.

That makes no sense. When you punish a governmental entity, you are punishing the people. And don't now say I don't want PSU to be punished because I've been clear that is not what I'm saying. I'm saying you can't punish them in a way that shuts down or destroys the institution.

 

[HuskyFan16]

I hated TARP too, but if you're going to make that comparison can you explain how the two are similar?

How is allowing a state school to continue educating people even vaguely similar to forcing financial institutions to take federal money?

My point was not of the similarities in addressing the problem, but in the way the media represented the organizations. Unlike some here I really don't care how large and powerful Penn State football (or wall street investment banks) got, but being that powerful doesnt mean they get to shed their personal responsibility.

 

[businesslawyer]

This is a serious question. I know it was a different time and legal stuff was handled differently but was SMU given the chance to defend itself against the death penalty and did they challenge it? Was just curious about this.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

I do not recall if they challenged it in court. I know they challenged it to the NCAA.

 

[HuskyFan16]

That makes no sense. When you punish a governmental entity, you are punishing the people. And don't now say I don't want PSU to be punished because I've been clear that is not what I'm saying. I'm saying you can't punish them in a way that shuts down or destroys the institution.

That makes no sense. When you punish a governmental entity, you are punishing the people. And don't now say I don't want PSU to be punished because I've been clear that is not what I'm saying. I'm saying you can't punish them in a way that shuts down or destroys the institution.

When you punish anyone, your punishing innocent people, that's what we've been talking about the whole time with collateral damage.

 

[Johnbuoy]

Middle school to paint over Paterno mural

While officials at Penn State University struggle over what to do about the statue of Joe Paterno, a middle school in Connecticut wasted little time in coming to a decision about a mural featuring the late, disgraced former football coach.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/paterno-mural-paint-over-134429679.html

 

[businesslawyer]

When you punish anyone, your punishing innocent people, that's what we've been talking about the whole time with collateral damage.

Why are you just throwing cliches out. Of course you are punishing innocent people whenever you punish somebody or something. I've said that and that I want punishments.

But saying innocent people always are collateral damage to punishments is entirely irrelevant to asking yourself if the punishment, given the collateral damage being caused, makes any duck*ing sense. And a punishment that would shut down the University does not.

I'm not responding again. I've made my point and I don't see anyone outside a few posts on this board disagreeing with it. Frankly, I don't see anyone else making the point that it would be o.k. to destroy the entire University over this. So you may either try to think why that might be, or have at it. Have a nice day.

 

[businesslawyer]

OMG yes, it should come down. How can that even be debated?

In our country, when people obtain cult-like status, there are those who will support them no matter what. I don't get that, but I have seen it in plenty of examples other than this. Joe Pa did many, many good things for Penn State during his career. And, in writing his legacy, you should no more ignore the good than the bad.

But you don't honor people with a statute who did what he did just because they did good as well. Look at it this way -- he put at risk every male child in the State College community over a long period of time just so there would be a statue of him one day. It needs to come down.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Why are you just throwing cliches out. Of course you are punishing innocent people whenever you punish somebody or something. I've said that and that I want punishments.

But saying innocent people always are collateral damage to punishments is entirely irrelevant to asking yourself if the punishment, given the collateral damage being caused, makes any duck*ing sense. And a punishment that would shut down the University does not.

I'm not responding again. I've made my point and I don't see anyone outside a few posts on this board disagreeing with it. Frankly, I don't see anyone else making the point that it would be o.k. to destroy the entire University over this. So you may either try to think why that might be, or have at it. Have a nice day.

I found myself in the women's hoops forum discussing this the past few days. There is strong opposition among intelligent people to shutting down PSU football because of the "damage" it would do to the local community, not to have the 8 football games on fall saturdays in State College.

I've grown tired of defending my position in regards to that, it's a luxury to be able to debate the merits of collateral damage, and innocent people, when it comes to things like administering penalties for transgressions. I like the way you put it here BL. What would happen to people of PSU community without the commerce of football is no different than what happens in an entire community, when say a trade embargo restricting that communitie's fuel sources is enacted.

The primary question to be asked, and answered is the if the culture of PSU, is to be punished by an external source.

To me the answer is yes.

All that remains, is determining what the target(s) are to adminster punishment in that culture, and where the punishment comes from. The football program and the NCAA, are one pair to matchup up to answer that question, among others.

Collateral damage? Yes, gonna happen. Brace for it. Better to be able to anticipate and prepare for the economic difficulties that a community may face without the commerce of 8 home football games in the fall, than say be part of a culture of which an external source of power decided your culture is need of punishment, and say.....being totally unprepared for having that external source of influence bringing down the two tallest buildings in NYC on top of your head and have dead bodies all around on the streets.

I grow tired of the argument. The most powerful and effective step that can be taken right now to affect positive change, is to shut down the football program. The negative consequences are not significant enough to rule it out, and hte immediate, sweeping effect too great.

And by that, I'm not advocating the same thing SMU got. I think they don't play any home games, they play all 12 on the road, they don't go to the post season, and they're not on TV. Duration of time TBD.

That way, no other univeristies are harmed.

Football is only one direction, that I am learning day by day, that culture of PSU needs to be concerned about receiving punishment from, it's going to come from many directions.

 

[BlueMAB]

Or Penn State could just do the right thing, sanction themselves and announce that after this season, they will suspend football for at least one season and take a few years off being on TV in order to regain the academic and educational focus. This saves the NCAA alot of time and energy in that they won't pay a team of 100 lawyers to find a way to justify giving them the death penalty, and then the football side of this can just move on.

This doesn't address the fact that the victims will and should continue to sue the pants off of the school for basically putting them in harm's way.

At this point it just seems that their strategy is to wait this thing out and hope it blows over. Reshufflling the University's wire diagram and conduct ethics reviews and panels is just BS.

I don't think this is a bad idea, but.

Do you honestly think the NCAA wouldn't perform an investigation and add their own sanctions anyway?

 

[BlueMAB]

My point was not of the similarities in addressing the problem, but in the way the media represented the organizations. Unlike some here I really don't care how large and powerful Penn State football (or wall street investment banks) got, but being that powerful doesnt mean they get to shed their personal responsibility.

Ok, fair enough. I don't think many people (outside of Happy Valley and their alum) are arguing they shouldn't be punished.

 

[HuskyFan16]

Why are you just throwing cliches out. Of course you are punishing innocent people whenever you punish somebody or something. I've said that and that I want punishments.

But saying innocent people always are collateral damage to punishments is entirely irrelevant to asking yourself if the punishment, given the collateral damage being caused, makes any duck*ing sense. And a punishment that would shut down the University does not.

I'm not responding again. I've made my point and I don't see anyone outside a few posts on this board disagreeing with it. Frankly, I don't see anyone else making the point that it would be o.k. to destroy the entire University over this. So you may either try to think why that might be, or have at it. Have a nice day.

First off, tone it down dude your getting a tad dramatic, even with a football ban, and withholding federal funding and an insane amount of civil damages the university is not closing shop (and to assume all three actually do happen is a bit unrealistic). Between their endowment, private donations and any emergency state funding, Pennsylvania will be able to keep open PSU.

 

[BlueMAB]

I think they don't play any home games, they play all 12 on the road, they don't go to the post season, and they're not on TV. Duration of time TBD.

That way, no other univeristies are harmed.

Not allowing OSU to broadcast their game against PSU would harm OSU.

I'm not disagreeing with a TV ban at all, just disagreeing with the conclustion that it doesn't harm any other schools. It harms just about everyone they play, as well as ESPN and the BTN.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Not allowing OSU to broadcast their game against PSU would harm OSU.

I'm not disagreeing with a TV ban at all, just disagreeing with the conclustion that it doesn't harm any other schools. It harms just about everyone they play, as well as ESPN and the BTN.

You keep them on TV then, and then have htem forfeit their revenue to their opponent that day, or better yet, donate their revenue to a child abuse prevention entity.

 

[businesslawyer]

First off, tone it down dude your getting a tad dramatic, even with a football ban, and withholding federal funding and an insane amount of civil damages the university is not closing shop (and to assume all three actually do happen is a bit unrealistic). Between their endowment, private donations and any emergency state funding, Pennsylvania will be able to keep open PSU.

I have done legal work in the higher education field. My understanding from the business people is that institutions can not survive the loss of federal student loan support. And, if you really don't see major differences between "depriving" a student who happens to be at PSU from a football program with depriving him of participation in the federal student loan program that his and his family's tax dollars are paying for, I don't know what to say.

You say drama -- I say an unbelievably unrealistic position. Potatoe, potato I guess.,

 

[superjohn]

The NCAA is going to have to let Penn State players transfer and be eligible immediately. I would have to think UConn will be attractive to Silas Redd, Fortt and Golden. What does everyone think?

 

[Chin Diesel]

I think this thread will go to helll in under 20 minutes.

 

[ktuck911]

Nothing's happening until '13... Something tells me they'll get a light smack this season ( no bowl game ) then next year the wheels fall off.

 

[Doggie Style]

Pretty sure every Penn State competitor as it pertains to recruiting, has and are having daily meetings at this point to discuss how they are going to go after every one of these kids! The sharks r circle'n, and Penn State is gonna need a bigger boat!!!

 

[Nostical]

-- he put at risk every male child in the State College community over a long period of time just so there would be a statue of him one day. It needs to come down.

This.

 

[ZooCougar]

I don't think this is a bad idea, but.

Do you honestly think the NCAA wouldn't perform an investigation and add their own sanctions anyway?

They most certainly would, and then probably accept Penn State's self sanctions as "time served". Penn State should bite the bullet.

 

[CL82]

OMG yes, it should come down. How can that even be debated?

In our country, when people obtain cult-like status, there are those who will support them no matter what. I don't get that, but I have seen it in plenty of examples other than this. Joe Pa did many, many good things for Penn State during his career. And, in writing his legacy, you should no more ignore the good than the bad.

But you don't honor people with a statute who did what he did just because they did good as well. Look at it this way -- he put at risk every male child in the State College community over a long period of time just so there would be a statue of him one day. It needs to come down.

Well said Biz.

 

[ZooCougar]

Unless it has to do with politics or Edsall, I will usually agree with BL, and in this case I am also a bit dumbfounded as to why certain people would even consider leaving that statue up.

In my opinion, that football program needs a complete "reboot".