I know this thread has probably been made a Brazilian times, but hear me out. This one asks a more specific question:
Is the life sentence without parole worse than the death sentence? I am not asking if you think it is legal, but if it is worse to rot in prison or to die without pain?
can we not meet in the middle with this debate? life or death? how about torture
Torute is inhumane, cruel, and leads to nothing but hate from all countries. You know what happened to the last dude who was convicted with torute? It wasn't good. Lets just say it has something to do with the title of this thread.
In all honesty, it depends on the crime. If you take the life of someone else, then you should have your life taken from you. Now, this could either be literal, death penalty, or as an expression: prison for life. Either way, you will have no life. No one would look at you the same if you get out of prison (seeing as how a life sentence is really only 20 years or so).
if a guy walks into my house with a gun.. and i stab him to death.. i dont feel i should go to jail at all
I sort of agree with you, but the intruder would have to attack first then you could fight back. Otherwise, the police would think you were responsible for the death. But if he attacked first, you would be fine and would be defending yourself from a violent intruder.
but the intruder would have to attack first then you could fight back
That applies only if the attacker is unarmed, if someone punches a person and that person strikes back there is no crime, it's considered reasonable force. However, if the person who was attacked continues striking the original attacker, even after he poses no viable threat it's considered excessive force. Nevertheless the police and the public prosecutors are usually quite lenient in such cases. Note: this commonly applies in public spaces. If a person is attacked in his own property -ceteris paribus- he can use more force (i.e. strike first). A person can stab an armed intruder, because if he waits for the attacker to shoot first he has quite good chances of suffering serious bodily harm. Again, it's all about reasonable force, if he stabs the intruder thirty times or something and he kills him, in all likelihood he will be arrested.
I think it really depends on who it is being sentenced. A lot of times a jail cell is a better life than the criminal led on their own. They get three meals a day. Temperature controlled rooms, exercise, etc. all at the expense of you and me. Now keep in mind that this is assuming the convict led a poor financial life in the first place. Personally, I think it is worse to be executed and I believe it should be a punishment for heinous crimes.
The death penalty may be better in certain cases, as the above person said. It may be better just to die quickly than living with the guilt of knowing you committed the horrible crime you must have committed that landed you in prison for life. Of course, that only applies to those who actually feel guilty for the crimes they committed.
^^What if they are psychopaths? Then they have to be imprisoned or put to death. And psychiatric help may or may not worlk but what happens in the meantime.
