3 men 1 hammer should not be online

The Story: In 2007, two Ukrainian men went on a murder spree killing about 21 people. They videotaped some of the murders and one was leaked on the net. The killers were sentenced to life imprisonment and a third accomplice received nine years for his role. . http://www.unian.net... . http://en.wikipedia.org... The video of one murder made the rounds and greatly affected those who watched it. . http://www.timesonline.co.uk... The video is horrific and the images will stick with you; it is truly disturbing. I am not interested in re trying the case as this debate is about the video. For the purposes of this debate, I will stipulate the video is real and an actual murder took place on camera. Pro's position is that the video should not have been put online because the availability gives the murders credit for the killings. I think by credit she means celebrity status, as the video implicated them in the crime regardless of the fact that it made the net. Con's Position: I agree these two killers will be idolized by some people and many will find the horror fascinating, but the video also forces one to put her cards on the table and stand by her convictions in the face of the sheer depravity humans are capable committing. I support the position that every person should watch the video before claiming any position related to crime and punishment. I come by my liberalism honestly. I am well aware of the heinousness of crime, yet I do not support beating and torturing the worst of us and I am adamantly opposed to the death penalty as a domestic penalty. This video did not change my position, but viewing this will force us to look deeper at the positions we hold concerning crime. This video is a gut check to say the least. Some may find the video to be proof that some criminals should be put to death. Some may empathize with police who deal with these matters everyday. This video brings out many emotions and puts the nature of crime in an unedited, unscripted, real life manner. Many people have never come face to face with such a scenario yet these same people can rattle of all the right rhetoric concerning crime and society. Brutal murder is a great Hollywood business. We have many movies featuring mobsters torturing then murdering victims (Goodfellas, Casino, Scarface, etc) and the torturers are the heroes of the film in most cases. Mobsters have done this sort of thing for hundreds of years and they are idolized because the movies have desensitized audiences to violent crime by portraying it in a fictional world where the actors get up after the camera is turned off. Real life mobsters are made out to be tough guys and celebrities. This video reminds all of us that nothing is glamorous about murder in this fashion. The murder video, although heinous, will show the world what true crime is like in real life, not television; therefore, citizens will have a better view on matters concerning crime and punishment so as to evaluate criminal laws in a more informed light. COST/BENEFIT If Pro can show that the negative aspects of this video being on the net outweigh the benefit of citizens being more aware of real life crime then I urge a vote for Pro. At this point, her only complaint is that the video gives the criminals an audience. I do not see this as being a bad thing. I want the world to see this and search deep. Information, in this case, is not a bad thing.