+126

People should sit in prison for the rest of their lives rather than get the death penalty, amirite?

57%Yeah You Are43%No Way
Bres avatar Politics
Share
10 132
The voters have decided that Bre is right! Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.
This user has deactivated their account.
@1763267

Alright, it's creepy when you do it wary smilie

KickAsss avatar KickAss No Way +40Reply
@1763267

You've been a bad boy timmy! Go to your cell and think about what you did!

Naughty naughty

KickAsss avatar KickAss No Way +30Reply
@1763267

How expensive.

Mooses avatar Moose No Way -1Reply

I'm actually quite surprised that this post is negative. There are more liberals than conservatives on the Internet (from my experience) and usually conservatives are the ones for the death penalty.

goodtimes avatar goodtime No Way +11Reply
@goodtime I'm actually quite surprised that this post is negative. There are more liberals than conservatives on the Internet...

That's what I was thinking, especially on this website that undoubtedly has a liberal majority. When I first made a comment on this, supporting the death penalty, I fully expected it to get downvoted because of that.
The post is positive now, but not by much.

I dont see how its fair that tax payers money should be used on upkeeping people who have no desire to be an active part of society.

deeviants avatar deeviant Yeah You Are +11Reply
@deeviant I dont see how its fair that tax payers money should be used on upkeeping people who have no desire to be an active...

@toast The reason it's so expensive is that we have to painstakingly go through every piece of evidence to make sure we haven't wrongfully convicted anyone. This takes years and a lot of work. Obviously this is necessary, so the death penalty won't be cheapening any time soon.

sparesecondss avatar spareseconds Yeah You Are +2Reply
@deeviant I dont see how its fair that tax payers money should be used on upkeeping people who have no desire to be an active...

I find this so hard to believe... depending on the age of the convict we could be paying for 75+ years of food, shelter, plumbing, electricity, clothing, and even entertainment...

@deeviant I dont see how its fair that tax payers money should be used on upkeeping people who have no desire to be an active...

In South Africa, its been shown that on average prisoners in state facilities have higher standards of living than senior citizens in retirement homes- so yes, I do kind of agree. Even though I know that the legal costs involved in years of appeals can also be astronomical.

deeviants avatar deeviant Yeah You Are 0Reply
@deeviant I dont see how its fair that tax payers money should be used on upkeeping people who have no desire to be an active...

Think of it as paying for your safety. Aren't prisons pretty self-sustaining anyway. I think they have jobs there, too.

No prisoners SUCK, if they killed someone they should get the death penalty. An eye for an eye and a life for a life. Think about all the people that were hurt by.. by these MONSTERS!

KickAsss avatar KickAss No Way +10Reply
@KickAss No prisoners SUCK, if they killed someone they should get the death penalty. An eye for an eye and a life for a...

Yeah really horrible! Eating food, they didn't work for. Getting shelter they didn't earn. Oh the agony... THE agony.... It's so much better in the real world.

Where you work countless hours a week working a thankless job. Barely having money for family or self and losing your house and living in the streets or working until you are so stressed out, you lose your mind. That is the life man!

KickAsss avatar KickAss No Way +61Reply
@KickAss No prisoners SUCK, if they killed someone they should get the death penalty. An eye for an eye and a life for a...

I completely disagree with you, Super. People who live in prison, if they behave correctly, get access to books, TV's, newspapers, music, & hell, other people. They form bonds & friendships just like you do outside of prison walls. The only difference is they are incarcerated & have more strict rules to follow. People who serve long prison sentences (not on death row) come out in the real world & feel completely lost. They feel more comfortable in prison, actually.

Bres avatar Bre Yeah You Are +35Reply
@KickAss No prisoners SUCK, if they killed someone they should get the death penalty. An eye for an eye and a life for a...

They should rot in jail. Can you imagine that? Just sitting in prison for like 60 years, doing nothing? Same thing every day? That would be horrible.

SuperSukhs avatar SuperSukh Yeah You Are +28Reply
@KickAss No prisoners SUCK, if they killed someone they should get the death penalty. An eye for an eye and a life for a...

If you guys think that being in prison for the rest of your life is better than "real life," I suggest you get out more.

@KickAss No prisoners SUCK, if they killed someone they should get the death penalty. An eye for an eye and a life for a...

Yeah but you have freedom and power over your own body. Prisoners don't have freedom and they get raped a lot....but seriously. If you had to do the same exact thing every day until you died, that would suck. Like, you didn't have a say in it. It'd be like (for you), working your thankless job every day until you died. You couldn't quit, you just HAD to do it. And you didn't get paid. The "real world" is so much better than prison. You have family, friends, love life, music concerts, and you can do whatever you want, really.

SuperSukhs avatar SuperSukh Yeah You Are +12Reply
@KickAss No prisoners SUCK, if they killed someone they should get the death penalty. An eye for an eye and a life for a...

Setting all morals and values aside, I think this should be decided on which costs more: Feeding and sheltering a convicted murderer for the rest of their life or sentencing them to death (the death penalty isn't as cheap as you might think if you factor in all of the costs). No matter what you do to a prisoner, taxpayers are the ones paying for it.

@KickAss No prisoners SUCK, if they killed someone they should get the death penalty. An eye for an eye and a life for a...

Personally, I would not support limiting appeals. While some guilty defendants abuse the appeals system, it is designed to help ensure innocent people are not convicted. I think if court system takes upon itself the power to sentence people to death, it has the responsibility to take every precaution to be sure it has the right person - even if it means higher costs.

@KickAss No prisoners SUCK, if they killed someone they should get the death penalty. An eye for an eye and a life for a...

But see now we get on this whole theoretical debate of what is, "freedom."

Are we truly free? Because I mean we obviously have all these laws in place to stop us from ever being truly, "free" in addition to that, we need to do certain things in order to enjoy our, "freedom." Like you need money to go to concerts... to eat, to have a home. And to make money, you need a job. And to have and keep your job, you need certain things. You can't just quit your job willy nilly and expect to be just fine... unless you have another one. And even though you may not be doing "the same thing everyday" you are, in the sense you'll be working, "everyday." Catch what I'm throwing your way?

@KickAss No prisoners SUCK, if they killed someone they should get the death penalty. An eye for an eye and a life for a...

@StickCaveman Just so you know, feeding and sheltering a convicted murderer for the rest of their life is easily the cheaper option. The current legal costs far outweigh the cost of imprisonment.

@KickAss No prisoners SUCK, if they killed someone they should get the death penalty. An eye for an eye and a life for a...

Most of the cost is from the legal stuff. The injection or chair are considerably cheaper. What shoudl be done is to limit the number of appeals you can have to say, two. Some murderers, even knowing they're never going to be not guilty, continue to appeal to waste the state's money.

@KickAss No prisoners SUCK, if they killed someone they should get the death penalty. An eye for an eye and a life for a...

@ShannonIsAUnicorn prison isn't better than real life for us, but for someone who has spent a long time in prison it is. My uncle is an example of that, he would do things just to go to federal prison.

@KickAss No prisoners SUCK, if they killed someone they should get the death penalty. An eye for an eye and a life for a...

They're different. In an election, either candidate is a suitable selection. But in a death penalty case, there is a right and a wrong decision and getting it wrong means taking an innocent life. If it takes more appeals to make the right decision, then there should be more appeals.

See, I have a difficult time deciding this. What gives anyone the power to kill someone else and it be considered ok? Even if the person being killed is a criminal. However, if someone ever did anything to someone I loved, then I would want them dead. I guess it still doesn't make it "ok," but that is how I would feel.

@UmmmmUmUmUmUmmmmmmm See, I have a difficult time deciding this. What gives anyone the power to kill someone else and it be considered...

But then let's say the criminal that committed the crime is someone who would have lived a worse life on the streets. They're living in prison, getting free food and shelter... they're getting rewarded for their bad actions. But I guess it's okay, cos "we value human life so much" no smilie

@UmmmmUmUmUmUmmmmmmm See, I have a difficult time deciding this. What gives anyone the power to kill someone else and it be considered...

Well, I'm telling you the reason for "someone to kill someone else and it be considered okay" un smilie

@UmmmmUmUmUmUmmmmmmm See, I have a difficult time deciding this. What gives anyone the power to kill someone else and it be considered...

Wah? Who said anything about being better than anyone? The justification is that it's their mother fokkin job!

It's too expensive to keep every person that kills someone in prison like that. I think if somebody is a serial killer that has either confessed, been identified in a line up, or has no reasonable doubt that they're innocent, they should go to death row. It doesn't really matter that they get worse punishment by sitting in a jail cell.

Now please excuse me while this comment gets downvoted.

@Statefarm It's too expensive to keep every person that kills someone in prison like that. I think if somebody is a serial...

So throw them in an arena like The Hunger Games? hmm smilie Sounds plausible. But isn't that basically just the "yard" at any typical prison?

Bres avatar Bre Yeah You Are +17Reply
@Statefarm It's too expensive to keep every person that kills someone in prison like that. I think if somebody is a serial...

That's really interesting. I had always been told the death penalty was cheaper. You'd thinl the government would be better at killing people cheaply. They could get ideas from all of the other inmates. y smilie

@Statefarm It's too expensive to keep every person that kills someone in prison like that. I think if somebody is a serial...

Did you know it's actually more expensive to put someone to death than it is to keep them in jail for life? Just saying.

Bres avatar Bre Yeah You Are +14Reply
@Bre Did you know it's actually more expensive to put someone to death than it is to keep them in jail for life? Just saying.

For goodness sake, why's it so expensive? Why doesn't someone just take the criminal outside and donk them on the head with a hammer after the trial?

@Statefarm It's too expensive to keep every person that kills someone in prison like that. I think if somebody is a serial...

I'm no medical expert, but "donking" someone on the head with a hammer probably wouldn't kill them.

J_A_C_Ks avatar J_A_C_K No Way +10Reply
@Statefarm It's too expensive to keep every person that kills someone in prison like that. I think if somebody is a serial...

also there are many racial elements that come into play. for instance, the african american population of colorado is somewhere like 5% but the death row population is 100%

iamthewalruss avatar iamthewalrus Yeah You Are +5Reply
@Statefarm It's too expensive to keep every person that kills someone in prison like that. I think if somebody is a serial...

The reason it's more expensive to put them to death is all of the appeals. If they would just put a limit on the amount of times one could appeal a sentence, it really would be a much less expensive way to go. Unfortunately, that's not likely to happen as lawyers run this country, and they are the ones profiting from keeping these matters in the court system as long as possible.

@Statefarm It's too expensive to keep every person that kills someone in prison like that. I think if somebody is a serial...

@Chasing_Echos, personally, I was shocked at hell to find out that information. I was a very close follower of the Troy Davis case, in fact, did an entire concept paper for uni regarding it. Our legal system definitely has some flaws, I'm not going to deny that.

Bres avatar Bre Yeah You Are +2Reply
@Statefarm It's too expensive to keep every person that kills someone in prison like that. I think if somebody is a serial...

Haha, touche. I wasn't trying to make a smart remark, that's just what that scenario reminded me of. :)

Bres avatar Bre Yeah You Are +1Reply
@Statefarm It's too expensive to keep every person that kills someone in prison like that. I think if somebody is a serial...

MOST DEFINITELY. & even a gender element. Only 5% of people put to death in the US post-Furman era were women.

Bres avatar Bre Yeah You Are +1Reply
@Statefarm It's too expensive to keep every person that kills someone in prison like that. I think if somebody is a serial...

@TheEpicFail your island idea sounds more like Lord of the Flies than the Hunger Games. Imagine though: if all those boys could turn savage, what would happen to murderers?
Scary.

eastcoasts avatar eastcoast Yeah You Are +1Reply
@Statefarm It's too expensive to keep every person that kills someone in prison like that. I think if somebody is a serial...

@Bre There are also less (serial) murderers that are women if I remember correctly, so that would explain a part of the difference.

@Statefarm It's too expensive to keep every person that kills someone in prison like that. I think if somebody is a serial...

That tells me about death row. Not the actual process. I knew death row was expensive. That's why I voted NW. Also because of the Troy Davis case and others like it. I just found it unlikely that the actual sentence cost more than life in prison.

Scientists avatar Scientist Yeah You Are 0Reply
@Statefarm It's too expensive to keep every person that kills someone in prison like that. I think if somebody is a serial...

@eastcoast it sounds more like that movie: The condemned. except the "winner gets released" part

If we were absolutely sure that somebody committed a crime, and we found a way to make the death penalty less ridiculously expensive, I would be in full support of it.

Well technically, someone who has the death penalty WILL be sitting in prison for the rest of his or her life.

Personally I think the death penalty should only be used when rehabilitation is impossible. Putting a criminal to death won't undo his or her crimes. However, some good points have been made here for the death penalty... so I guess I'm in the middle.

Why dont we put people in prison, but give them the choice to be killed? I'm sure some people, after 20 years of a life sentence, might like the idea.

I find it humorous that people keep using the argument "and eye for an eye". If they actually read Hammurabi's Code, I don't think they'd quote it so frequently.

A person who has been sentenced to serve death row just seems like some kind of scapegoat which society has granted upon them. Killing people does not undo their wrongs, nor does letting them live with their conscience. There is no ethereal plan to devise, and no one will ever agree upon some deserved method to follow.
That said, I believe that the fate of the convicted murderer should be for those closest to the victim to decide. If they wish for this person to be killed, so be it. If it is expensive to execute someone, let the guilty be the ones to pay for it.

This brings us to the next argument: How does society benefit to having someone segregated from the world for their wrongdoings? Many prisoners populate penitentiaries for the benefit of free food and a place to sleep, and this only escalates crime. Prisoners should have some form of rewarded payment to have meals and drinks. This should not have to be paid for by hard working tax payers' money.

@Hullabaloo A person who has been sentenced to serve death row just seems like some kind of scapegoat which society has granted...

Honestly, I don't think someone deserves to die for white-collar crime. A person who is capable of it clearly possesses the capabilities of someone who could serve their community good. As I said, there is no perfect solution for injustice. A banker who is stealing from a family does not hurt them to the same extent as a serial killer. They might cause domestic problems, but it's not like they took someone's life.

Breanna, we have the same thing here. But don't you think those prisoners are effectively taking jobs that could have helped someone to support their family? By "rewarded payment", I mean doing things such as chores around the prison grounds. Those who choose not to work, don't get food.

@Hullabaloo A person who has been sentenced to serve death row just seems like some kind of scapegoat which society has granted...

Prisoners do get jobs if they are of decent behaviour. Well known jobs (in America) of prisoners is highway trash cleaning & making license plates.

Bres avatar Bre Yeah You Are +1Reply
@Hullabaloo A person who has been sentenced to serve death row just seems like some kind of scapegoat which society has granted...

But isn't robbing someone of all their belongings a slower and at times harsher death than just killing them? I mean if you think about it, a shot to the head isn't as bad as losing all your life savings and having to work past your retirement age... or having to have skipped on meals or having to lose your house? Your car? If this leads a person to commit suicide, isn't the person who did it, indirectly responsible for their life? It'd be like hiring a hit-man or mercenary... or the saying with, "people don't kill people, guns do." If you want to play a blame game, then it's a never ending chain of blames.

@Hullabaloo A person who has been sentenced to serve death row just seems like some kind of scapegoat which society has granted...

Yes, I do agree with the first part, the people imprisoned are just like, "Hey I'm on death row, so I guess it's okay I raped and killed 10 kids. smirk smilie"

But the second part, I partially agree with you. I talked to Russ about this and we both agree that if and only if their prisons are nice and comfortable should they be allowed to have the option of death.

This kind of makes me think about all the white collar criminals who have screwed over thousands of people and don't get anywhere near the death penalty. Do you think they should? After all a serial killer doesn't do nearly as hurt as many people as a banker who is stealing from the bank or whatever.

Way to pick something controversial. These comments are DEEP.

People who commit crimes "worthy" of getting the death penalty should just be put in prisons that have poorer conditions. Worse food, worse showers, worse cells, etc. That way, it would cost less, and they would face a harsher punishment. They should also be kept in isolation.

This is kind of a crack idea, but what if we gave them a choice? What if they want to die rather than face a lifetime in prison?

cherryblasters avatar cherryblaster Yeah You Are +6Reply
@cherryblaster People who commit crimes "worthy" of getting the death penalty should just be put in prisons that have poorer...

I don't believe they should get a choice in the matter. They are in jail facing death row / life imprisonment, they've obviously done something wrong enough to not deserve a choice in the matter.

Bres avatar Bre Yeah You Are +1Reply

In my opinion, the current system is horrible and doesn't work. I also believe people are looking at this thing entirely the wrong way. "An eye for an eye" Are we children? That mentality is barbaric and should be forgotten. Prisons shouldn't serve the purpose of punishing people or preventing crime, they should serve the purposes of rehabilitating criminals and preventing people unable to be rehabilitated from returning to society. If I had my own country, here's how I would run shit: First off, I would use the American system as a START, and have a massive brainstorming session to make necessary adjustments. The alterations to law would keep prisons from being overcrowded and prevent crimes in their own right. Secondly, prisons would be large rehab-centers. There would also be laws against privately owned prisons, or very strict laws controlling them. That's a terrifying fucking thought, and harms us a lot. There would be multiple steps to attempting to get prisoners ready to get back in to society, rather than terrifying them and just keeping them in a building until their sentence is up. Prisoners who prove impossible to rehabilitate, regardless of their crimes, would be put...

@Mike_Hawk In my opinion, the current system is horrible and doesn't work. I also believe people are looking at this thing...

To death. There's no intention to punish them for doing wrong, there's no intention to emotionally satisfy anyone, nothing. Killing someone is just the best course of action for dealing with a dangerous person who is unfit for the society they live in. Exceptions would be for testing medications on them, studying them to find out exactly what makes them what they are in order to prevent their kind from being around, and possibly sending them to other countries. Humans are too imperfect for any of this to work, though. Everyone has their own motives that contradict the needs of the many, and emotions that often contradict fact. Personally, I think societies made up almost solely of people with Asperger's Syndrome would absolutely flourish.

The negatives of the death penalty far outweigh the positives.

SpearmintMilks avatar SpearmintMilk Yeah You Are +4Reply
@SpearmintMilk The negatives of the death penalty far outweigh the positives.

But the whole problem with that is, that we live in a, "civilized" society and a bullet to the head is just so impolite hehe smilie

KickAsss avatar KickAss No Way +56Reply
@SpearmintMilk The negatives of the death penalty far outweigh the positives.

I'm really interested too. If we reformed the death penalty to something cheaper, like a bullet, it would be more practical.

@SpearmintMilk The negatives of the death penalty far outweigh the positives.

Ok Kick. The negatives of the death penalty (this might turn into a giant wall of text so sorry in advance)
-The outcome of cases are largely dependant on how much money the defendant has, a disproportionate amount of poor people are executed because they aren't able to afford a more skilled attorney.
-A disproportional amount of black and Hispanic men are executed compared to white men and women in general (although still more black and Hispanic women are executed than white).
-Juries aren't supposed to be bias, but they are, in the end they are just people with their own prejudices. Not just about race either, in the West Memphis Three case the guy who was sentenced to death (later released) largely due to the bias of the Jury against him as a Satanist in a Christian majority town.
-Capital punishment does not deter violent crime. Most murders are committed in the moment without thinking of the consequences and the ones that are premeditated they only do it because they think they can get away with it. A better way to reduce crime would be to reduce drug abuse and poverty.
-The cost of taking someone through the process of the death penalty is far higher than life in prison...

SpearmintMilks avatar SpearmintMilk Yeah You Are +24Reply
@SpearmintMilk The negatives of the death penalty far outweigh the positives.

-Families of the victim obviously want justice. Unfortunately a lot of the time they just want someone to pay for the crime. It doesn’t matter if the evidence is sketchy at best. They are understandably driven by emotion and not reason, but that doesn’t make it right. And other times even if the family doesn’t want the death penalty to be carried out it still is. That is not fair because they not only have lost a loved one they feel the guilt of a person being executed.
-Killing people for killing people doesn’t teach that killing is wrong, it just teaches that revenge can be achieved by killing. An eye for an eye mentality just continues the cycle of violence.

-This is all that it really takes for me to be against it though: The system is flawed. Innocent people are put to death.

SpearmintMilks avatar SpearmintMilk Yeah You Are +20Reply
@SpearmintMilk The negatives of the death penalty far outweigh the positives.

Mistakes happen! Innocent people die because of the death penalty... People don't think of their mistakes being in prison make them think and regret their decisions. Also places like canada focus more on rehabilitation rather than imprisonment so less people in jail/prison so no over population in prison making there place for them to live the rest of their lives in prison. Also like the classic We kill people that kill people to show that killing is bad. As for an eye for and eye. Should the prosecutor get the death penalty too since he took a life

Izzie_23s avatar Izzie_23 Yeah You Are +13Reply
@SpearmintMilk The negatives of the death penalty far outweigh the positives.

@mydaddidntpullout
Prisons aren't overcrowded because of murderers they are overcrowded because of people being put into jail for petty crimes. If more focus was to be put on rehabilitation then that would not be as much of a problem.

SpearmintMilks avatar SpearmintMilk Yeah You Are +12Reply
@SpearmintMilk The negatives of the death penalty far outweigh the positives.

Of course you'd say that ELLE... but why don't you enlighten us on as to how they outweigh the positives? Unless... you don't know smirk smilie

@SpearmintMilk The negatives of the death penalty far outweigh the positives.

Prisons don't even work, they're meant to satisfy the illusion of justice. Prisons are not "rehabilitation workshops", they can never truly assimilate them back into society. so they serve their sentence. Then what? come out and be "ready to work"? only to be shunned because they are listed as ex-cons?

@SpearmintMilk The negatives of the death penalty far outweigh the positives.

Yeah I agree @kickass but I have never been in that position where a family member has been murders but I think there should be a place where if the victims family doesn't want the death penalty the murderer shouldn't get it. I would fill pretty awful if someone died even if it was his/her fault

Izzie_23s avatar Izzie_23 Yeah You Are 0Reply
@SpearmintMilk The negatives of the death penalty far outweigh the positives.

There would be trials and expensive legal processes regardless of the death penalty. The only difference would be the sentencing.
And did you mean to make sure the person isn't guilty?

@SpearmintMilk The negatives of the death penalty far outweigh the positives.

@CherryBlossom - How the hell does the death penalty favor rich white people?

@SpearmintMilk The negatives of the death penalty far outweigh the positives.

That's so nice in your world but 1 word OVERCROWDING, and what are the negatives? a person seen as a threat to society is no longer with us. I'd say it's all good.

@SpearmintMilk The negatives of the death penalty far outweigh the positives.

The death penalty should be administered quickly and efficiently. By that, I mean a gunshot to the head. That isn't painful or cruel and it is certainly cheap. Anyone that would argue that the death penalty is inhumane is just a wuss. If someone does something so horrible as to warrant execution, they don't deserve to die in a "humane" fashion. They gave up the right to be treated well when they committed their crime. They are where they are for a reason, and that reason is not so that they would be comfortable, physically or mentally. The reason is punishment (and keeping them away from potential victims). Execution is the most severe form of that punishment and detainment, and as long as people choose to kill for the wrong reasons, they should be killed for the right reasons.

@SpearmintMilk The negatives of the death penalty far outweigh the positives.

First off: un smilie
Secondly: no one is, "innocent" if you want to be technical about this.
Thirdly: look at Canada... no one likes them.

But on a more serious note... you're pretty right hehe smilie

Except about prosecutor's, because that's their job, it'd be like killing a soldier for killing during a time of war no smilie.

Also, this isn't just a logical issue, but also a personal issue among many victims of family members who have been murdered... should their voice not be heard? I mean a lot of these murderers have killed, "innocent" men/women/children. How do you think their family members cope, knowing that the person who murdered their loved ones is still out there eating, drinking, working out... and possibly getting visited by HIS/HER loved ones?

Also, does "learning your lesson" earn your freedom?

KickAsss avatar KickAss No Way -28Reply

Completely agree. It is never morally right to kill another human being when other options are available, even if that human being is a lowlife motherfucker. On the other hand, keeping said motherfucker separated from everyone else is completely morally justifiable.

And at least that way if it turns out that they have been falsely sentenced, you don't need to attempt resurrection.

mstarmachs avatar mstarmach Yeah You Are +3Reply

All of this debate makes my brain hurt
so um.... enjoy this random comic!
http://ctrlv.in/107672

Favvkess avatar Favvkes Yeah You Are +2Reply

I think this is true. I don't remember who said this, but "It's better to let ten guilty men go free than to kill one innocent man" (it's something like that). Also lots of serial killers are insane and wouldn't even mind dying. And like everyone else said, it's cheaper to keep them in prison

Graverottis avatar Graverotti Yeah You Are +2Reply

I'm on the fence about this. I mean, it's expensive to keep someone in prison for life. For those saying going through the process of the death penalty is more expensive, perhaps we should make the process faster and cheaper. And reserve it for those who have undoubtly commited the crime, as in they admitted to it or something. I also feel like life in prison could be a far worse punishment than death. As for the morality of the subject regarding our respect for human life, I think that keeping someone imprisoned for their whole lives gives their life just about as much respect as just killing them. But it's still killing someone...

Side note: I don't think you can teach people not to kill. It doesn't matter if you "teach people not to kill by killing them" or not, people who want to murder people are going to murder them.

@LAWLZAttack I'm on the fence about this. I mean, it's expensive to keep someone in prison for life. For those saying going...

Criminals would find loopholes, like they would obtain their innocence until they are offered some kind of plea bargain like if they plead guilty, they won't be sentenced to death. Stuff like this happens all the time already.

I personally think that human life isn't as great as most people think it to be. Some people really are deserving of death. A life sentence for a life, and a life for two+ lives is how I see it.

It seems that a predominate reason that people are opposed to life in prison is that living conditions can prove to be very desirable.

So what if there was an isolated federal prison solely for killers that had poorer living conditions and no luxuries?

Anonymous +1Reply

Why give a convicted murderer a life in prison when he/she showed the victim no mercy? It bugs me that we spare the murderer's life when the murderer knew what they were doing.

@Richard Why give a convicted murderer a life in prison when he/she showed the victim no mercy? It bugs me that we spare...

Shouldn't society be a better people than the person who committed the murder? Should we really be okay with it, just because they did it?

Bres avatar Bre Yeah You Are +13Reply
@Richard Why give a convicted murderer a life in prison when he/she showed the victim no mercy? It bugs me that we spare...

Crimes aren't just going to stop when they're threatened with death. There are many killers who kill themselves after killing, for example the Columbine shooters. Killers are sick, mentally disturbed people who may not have critical thoughts as clear as ours. The threat of death scares us, normal people, but might not to most who are sick enough to kill. The best idea, I think, is to have the prisoner choose between death or a horrible, shitty prison.

sparesecondss avatar spareseconds Yeah You Are +3Reply

Life without parole = overcrowded prisons and higher taxes as the criminals reach a point that they have to be put into a specially made jail type nursing home. Death penalty = expensive, but less crowding.
I'm impartial here, but I lean more to the ban of the death penalty. Life with parole is the best idea, or, as kayawithpig says above, give prisoners the right to choose death.

Sending them to prison won't always work because there have been criminals that showed no remorse. Also, the living standard in prison I read is better than some places in the world.

I would mainly put the person in DR if they appear too dangerous to keep in jail.

Like the first dude in here needs to go:
YouTube video thumbnail

(also the other inmates are helping the guard, not hurting him)

Anonymous 0Reply

My dad always says that he's against the death penalty, but the victim's family should be allowed to kill the murderer/rapist/criminal

I disagree, but I just thought I'd bring it up to hear thoughts.

eastcoasts avatar eastcoast Yeah You Are 0Reply
@eastcoast My dad always says that he's against the death penalty, but the victim's family should be allowed to kill the...

I will never believe an eye for an eye is the right way to live. Period. I believe we, as a society, should be better than the criminal.

Bres avatar Bre Yeah You Are +3Reply

I'm not religious at all, but life is sacred and revenge doesn't help anything.

drhannahs avatar drhannah Yeah You Are 0Reply

I just think they should be buried alive, because that seems a lot more terrifying than being killed

A good old fashion stoning would be great, instead of paying for them to live in prison we'd make money off the entrance fees. Although we'd probably see a rise in crime from the masochist community.

Runys avatar Runy No Way 0Reply

Many who live deserve death
And many who die deserve life
Can you give that to them, Frodo?

Hard Labor camps!!!!

Anonymous 0Reply

to be honest, it doesn't really matter, since so few people actually get the death penalty nowadays anyway

Some people (like terrorists) need a taste of their own medicine

jwmcbs avatar jwmcb No Way 0Reply

I say if the person murdered was murdered quickly, then death penalty, any other way, slow rotting. If it was an accident... well... I guess... hmm...

More room with the death penalty.

I think it's worth bringing up the financial portion of this discussion. It costs an average of $47,000 a year to incarcerate an inmate. Over 60 years, that's almost 3 million dollars. Why should taxpayers have to pay that much to keep a murderer alive? Death penalty is much cheaper.

Anonymous -2Reply
This comment was deleted by its author.
@1763438

Why do people always make comments like this whenever there's a post guaranteed to get arguments started. As long as it's not just a bunch of comments telling the other person how stupid they are I think it's a great thing. Will one of the aggressors change their argument because of what the other person said? No. Probably not. If they have the balls to be a part of the argument they're probably pretty set in their beliefs. But the people who are on the fence reading could be seriously swayed.

Scientists avatar Scientist Yeah You Are +10Reply
@1763438

I agree 100%. Bickering is the opposite of having an educated discussion regarding a controversial issue.

Bres avatar Bre Yeah You Are +4Reply
@http://amirite.net/529431

Not the same, but nice try, anonymous.

Bres avatar Bre Yeah You Are 0Reply
Please   login   or signup   to leave a comment.