Is the sentence a good or bad policy? Some states allow it, and some countries aloow it, yet others dont. Yes, I know some of might say everyone deserves to live, and most of the time i would agree with you, but what if there is a man that has been tested positive for some sort of disorder that causes him to have a strong urge to kill at random times, and he was either about to be set free in your town or put to death. What would you say? There is the unethical and the inhumane reason, but a large reason many places ban it is the cost. Some states are backed up with people on death row, because they have to pay lawyers to file paperwork, and keep those hundreds, maybe thousands, of people alive for howver long. Think, do you really want your tax dollars going there?
I have to admit I'm not sure about the death sentance, seems kinda curel but I guess it might beat rotting away in jail, unless of course your working or produicing something. I'm just happy I've found a thread thats not about religeon.
I have to admit I'm not sure about the death sentance, seems kinda curel but I guess it might beat rotting away in jail, unless of course your working or produicing something. I'm just happy I've found a thread thats not about religeon.
Ah, yes, of course. Forced labor is much less cruel than just letting them rot there, we must implement this at once!
Yeah, leathal injection costs more. There is a lot of court work that needs to be done, and it adds up.
Then wouldn't that be an issue with the court?
Because it costs less than the execution? Also, I agree that simply letting people rotting in cells isn't great either; you just need to find something to let them do, they can produce things, work within the prison. Use those potential workers. Don't let them rot, don't kill them.
Once again, forced labor is better than letting them not have forced labor? Letting them sit in a cell is cruel, but having them work while some guard watches over them is ok? Not to mention the fact that whatever they would produce would be of low quality, having no motivation to actually do anything about it. And then there is, of course, the prison weapons everyone hears so much about, if you can't trust someone with a spoon how are you going to be able to trust them with some actual crafting materials?
Once again, forced labor is better than letting them not have forced labor? Letting them sit in a cell is cruel, but having them work while some guard watches over them is ok? Not to mention the fact that whatever they would produce would be of low quality, having no motivation to actually do anything about it. And then there is, of course, the prison weapons everyone hears so much about, if you can't trust someone with a spoon how are you going to be able to trust them with some actual crafting materials?
The way I see it, of course it's better for their psyche if they can occupy themselves, and believe me, some would be really motivated depending on what they're doing. Or would you rather enjoy sitting around in a cell doing nothing and getting mortally bored for the rest of your life, instead of having a regular activity? Not everyone in jail is a hopeless case, remember. Concerning weapons, if someone wants to harm someone or kill someone, they'll most likely succeed even with their hands. Of course you'd need a thorough control, and maybe even inventar of the objects, that could minimize the incidents.
You don't have to force them. Most prisoners are happy if they can work instead of rotting in their cell.
They should have them do simple stuff like assembling furniture for the homeless or something. Maybe even home construction. Something productive for society.
I believe that my opinion would be biased, but nevertheless, I feel inclined to share it.
Here in Turkey, we're dealing with a terrorist group known as the PKK. We captured the leader in 1999. He was going to be executed, but then it was turned into a lifetime imprisonment. Now he's in İmralı, living like a king, while elected politicians are imprisoned without trial. So yes, I support the death sentence. I'd like it to come back to my country. The leader of a group that is responsible for the death of appoximately 25,000 people (civilians included) living like a king bites me. There. I said it.
I can't say yay or nay to the death penalty because I don't know how it feels to have a loved one or someone close to me be possibly tortured, beaten, killed or *****. I may say no to it now but if someone I loved was brutally ***** and killed? Maybe I'd feel different I don't know.
I say no to the death sentence because, due to a slightly flawed legal system, there is never 100% certainty of whether someone is guilty or not. Innocent people can just as easily be executed as guilty ones can. If there was a perfect legal system, I believe I would support some forms of the death penalty, but since nothing can be perfect that is not my opinion.
The death sentence is neccasary, but if you live in an area like California that have hundreds of people on death row but are not "finishing" them, it costs a lot of tax money. So if you are going to have a death sentence, you need to actually use it. By the way, I am in support of this punishment.
Most prisoners are happy if they can work instead of rotting in their cell.
Why should the prisoners be happy? They're in there for a reason. It's a punishment. Although I'm not opposed to using prisoners as a means of production or labor force.
there is never 100% certainty of whether someone is guilty or not.
This is the only real argument I've heard against it. Yes, we can't be sure, and what's done is done.
I think there should be the death sentence but it's not a viable option unless it's 100% clear that the person is guilty.
This is the only real argument I've heard against it. Yes, we can't be sure, and what's done is done.
To add to that argument there have been numerous cases where a person was found innocent both before and after the fact of a death sentence. Since 1973 there have been 139 death row inmates who were found not guilty after the sentence has been carried out due to further evidence such as DNA evidence. This means out of the total number of people executed within the same time period we have had roughly an 11% error rate. If this is a representative rate, in total 1.3% of people put to death each year are innocent of the crime they are being put to death for. So it comes down to whether we think this is an acceptable loss of innocent life for what amounts to revenge.
Well it also rids society of a homicidal psychopath in clear cut cases like Wayne Gacy. I'm not one to judge others, but a vast majority of Singaporeans support the death penalty in my country and I hope it stays that way.
