Death penalty or life imprisonment?
Death
46.5% (40)
46.5% (40)
Imprisonment
53.5% (46)
53.5% (46)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Which is more merciful?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

This is really bothering me for some reason and I need some clarification. Keep in mind that this does not consider any monetary issues, purely moral.

I was reading the Castro thread and the amount of people saying that they wanted him to be tortured in jail are many posters. Now my issue is that I always believed people were against the death penalty because they wanted to be merciful. However, reading the Castro thread has made me question if jail is just an illusion. I mean, that confinement is meant as a cruel punishment disguised for the people shouting to stop the death penalty.

Humans are social creatures and thus any kind of confinement would be very painful mentally. So basically what I am asking is if the death penalty is more merciful (which I think it is).

(Bonus question!)If so, what does this say about humans?

EDIT: The person is 100% guilty.

I'd say this depends entirely on a large number of variables; their age, their mental and emotional state, the family links they have, even the prison itself. Some people sentenced to life in prison, such as Ian Brady, have said they would prefer to die.

The major benefit for the individual of imprisonment over death is that imprisonment can be ended if that person is found innocent. The horrible experience cannot be undone, but some modicum of a life could be salvaged after release. The death penalty cannot be undone, and there will always be those sentenced to the worst punishment possible, and later found innocent.

Er, there's a big difference between life imprisonment (in many nations at least) and solitary confinement. The latter is much worse.

Imprisonment is much worse. I honestly don't see how people can think death is that bad. Death doesn't suck because you're not around for it to suck.

I'd prefer life imprisonment to death, but would rather die if that turned to solitary confinement. They're massively different things and the latter is essentially a form of torture.

cthulhuspawn82:
Imprisonment is much worse. I honestly don't see how people can think death is that bad. Death doesn't suck because you're not around for it to suck.

Because 4 meals a day, free cable TV, free education and communal visits are a such bad way to spend the rest of your life that you rather die?

Verbatim:

cthulhuspawn82:
Imprisonment is much worse. I honestly don't see how people can think death is that bad. Death doesn't suck because you're not around for it to suck.

Because 4 meals a day, free cable TV, free education and communal visits are a such bad way to spend the rest of your life that you rather die?

You kinda missed his point. It's not a question of which he'd rather, life imprisonment or death, because once you're dead it's completely moot. You don't care anymore because there is no longer a you to care. You don't regret choosing death, you don't regret doing whatever you did to end up in that situation, you no longer exist and that's that.

I don't really see death itself as a punishment in all honesty. It's purpose is to remove that person from existence so they're no longer a burden on the rest of us. It's not a punishment.

And just for the record, i don't think 4 (poor quality, with no choice in the matter from you) meals a day, TV, free education, (restricted) communal visits and only those things, for the rest of your life, is quite as rosey as you make out.

Silvanus:

The major benefit for the individual of imprisonment over death is that imprisonment can be ended if that person is found innocent. The horrible experience cannot be undone, but some modicum of a life could be salvaged after release. The death penalty cannot be undone, and there will always be those sentenced to the worst punishment possible, and later found innocent.

I meant this question to be considered with the criminal being 100% guilty. And thus if it is more merciful to kill the person or imprison him/her for life.

thaluikhain:
Er, there's a big difference between life imprisonment (in many nations at least) and solitary confinement. The latter is much worse.

Esotera:
I'd prefer life imprisonment to death, but would rather die if that turned to solitary confinement. They're massively different things and the latter is essentially a form of torture.

That is a good point. Let's consider the effects of both and if one is more merciful than death, or neither are, etc.

I think they would both have mental effects, with solitary obviously being more extreme. However, I still think death would be more merciful because to have no freedom (or at least the illusion) would be awful.

Of course, religion might play an important role in which you consider the more merciful option.

cthulhuspawn82:
Imprisonment is much worse. I honestly don't see how people can think death is that bad. Death doesn't suck because you're not around for it to suck.

Yeah but the knowledge that there's a working death penalty would deterr a lot of crime from happening.

Life imprisonment without parole is a death penalty, and a particularly sadistic one at that.

Given a choice between death by slow mental and physical deprivation, or one by lethal injection, the latter is FAR more appealing. Hell, just take me out behind the courthouse and put a bullet in my head rather than stick me in that particular hellhole.

The only reasonable case to be made for life imprisonment in my opinion is the possibility of wrongful conviction. It is kind of tough to resurrect the dead when a mistake is discovered.

I have no problems with the death penalty provided you have 100%, irrefutable proof that the defendant committed the crime. For example, if the defendant admits, he's caught red handed, etc. If there's even a shred if doubt, it shouldn't be used.

Glongpre:

Humans are social creatures and thus any kind of confinement would be very painful mentally. So basically what I am asking is if the death penalty is more merciful (which I think it is).

It depends on the person, obviously. I think most people would take life imprisonment over death given the option. Death might be preferable if the prison you're sent to is a "living hell", but few if any Western prisons are.

I suspect a reason the likes of Castro and others who do things like this commit suicide is that they are people who get a huge buzz from or a deep psychological need for control and domination. They cannot mentally cope with not just losing their control, but now effectively being controlled and dominated in return. Death is preferable.

There's a famous child murderer in the UK called Ian Brady - utter psychopath. He has not committed suicide, but he has spent his last 40 or so years in psychiatric prison effectively trying to control, manipulate and draw attention to himself by every means possible. He loves trying to play people just for the sake of it. He's tried to argue he should die and gone on a (apparently somewhat fraudulent) hunger strike, but it's just a means for him to exert some control, have people running around doing stuff because of him, get more newspaper column inches, and so on. At least one of his victims' bodies has never been found, and one of his favourite trump cards to get people doing stuff at his say-so is saying he'll try to find it (again).

Imprisonment death is quick imprisonment depending on the prison if you talking about the one where you go to desert and are forces to work death would be better also small space can turn some people nuts

I'd certainly rather be dead than stuck in prison for the rest of my days, no matter how nice a place it is.

That being said, I oppose the death penalty for what it does to us, not necessarily because of its effect on prisoners.

Ask some people in jail for life if they'd rather die, and some people on Death Row if they'd rather go to jail for life. Look into how many people on Death Row appeal their sentences (i.e. virtually all of them), and how many people in jail for life appeal and ask for the death penalty instead (i.e. virtually none of them). There's an answer that doesn't rely on hypotheticals, such as a bunch of free people imagining which one they'd prefer when they are faced with neither. The human being is hard wired to choose life and fear death above all. Sure, some people choose to end their lives, but most don't even if faced with a miserable existence as the only alternative. Otherwise, suicide rates among lifers would be a lot higher.

No one is responding to the question I was asking in the OP. I want to know which is more merciful, sorry I'll try to see if I can change the title.

Mercy - to bring someone relief from something unpleasant.

Well, I'd say what's more merciful depends on where we're talking. In a US federal prison riddled with gang wars, forced labour and a society with a passionate hate for convicts you might as well call it a mercy to spare people that trauma.
On the other hand in a scandinavian prison for example, which has a far better environment inside, an actual focus on rehabilitation and a more accepting society once you get back out surely the greater mercy is letting that criminal serve his time and reintegrate.

Johnny Novgorod:

cthulhuspawn82:
Imprisonment is much worse. I honestly don't see how people can think death is that bad. Death doesn't suck because you're not around for it to suck.

Yeah but the knowledge that there's a working death penalty would deterr a lot of crime from happening.

Or does it? Especially since death penalties are only given for murder, which has far more spur of the moment incidents than, say, tax fraud. If I fill out form B-11 and neglect to mention my brand new yacht I might be deterred by the thought of a noose around my neck, whereas if I come home to find my wife nibbling the delivery boy's double salami pizza I bloody well shoot that guy without thought to consequences.

Verbatim:

cthulhuspawn82:
Imprisonment is much worse. I honestly don't see how people can think death is that bad. Death doesn't suck because you're not around for it to suck.

Because 4 meals a day, free cable TV, free education and communal visits are a such bad way to spend the rest of your life that you rather die?

Wait, four meals? Do prisoners get brunch? A scone for tea? Does a mint on your pillow count as a meal for tax reasons?

Shpongled:

And just for the record, i don't think 4 (poor quality, with no choice in the matter from you) meals a day, TV, free education, (restricted) communal visits and only those things, for the rest of your life, is quite as rosey as you make out.

And yes the confinement and loss of autonomy and humanity is enough to make most of them more entrenched criminals. Must be something shitty about it or that wouldn't happen.

meh, people on death row do get a nice quick painless death. Most people do not get that luxury. Some of us live long enough to watch everything that made us who we are disappear like with Alzheimer's, or we slowly fade away in a hospital for months while be subjected to various medical procedures and pills (and while in pain). There are a LOT worse ways to go, as most of us will unfortunately find out in our own lives.

Speaking of 'mercy' in regard to an institution is to misunderstand their nature, but to take it purely at face value...

The suffering you're worried about for isolation is problematic, but it can just as surely be had without being physically confined; there are ways of mentally shoring yourself up against such things. Besides, most prisons allow you to interact with other inmates and sometimes people from outside, unless you're in solitary confinement, so it's not as if all sociability is cut off.

Hell, you even get TV and internet in some prisons now; if you make some friends among the inmates, how is that much worse than the average modern person's life? So I guess your question becomes - is it better to kill off the typical modern man or let him live out an empty life?

TWRule:
Speaking of 'mercy' in regard to an institution is to misunderstand their nature, but to take it purely at face value...

The suffering you're worried about for isolation is problematic, but it can just as surely be had without being physically confined; there are ways of mentally shoring yourself up against such things. Besides, most prisons allow you to interact with other inmates and sometimes people from outside, unless you're in solitary confinement, so it's not as if all sociability is cut off.

Hell, you even get TV and internet in some prisons now; if you make some friends among the inmates, how is that much worse than the average modern person's life? So I guess your question becomes - is it better to kill off the typical modern man or let him live out an empty life?

choice and purpose

Even the most downtrodden among free citizens have some measure of the above two attributes, even if they are not taking advantage of it. Long term prisoners have nothing of the sort.

Since those two attributes also mark the difference between living and merely surviving...

Let me put it another way, most people find the idea of rest homes horrifying, even with the prospect of unlimited TV and no responsibility. Just rotting away in a chair or bed, waiting for life to finally end. Appealing right? Just imagine being stuck in one while in the prime of your life, and not just when your ability to care for yourself is in question.

Hell, at least for me, TV would make it even worse. Constant reminders of the things I will never be able to do.

Heronblade:
choice and purpose

Even the most downtrodden among free citizens have some measure of the above two attributes, even if they are not taking advantage of it. Long term prisoners have nothing of the sort.

You perplex me, my friend. How many people can honestly say they have a real sense of purpose in their lives, beyond survival and making themselves and/or those near them comfortable (or something vain like 'leaving their mark on the world')? I certainly haven't met more than a handful such people, anyway. I'm assuming you're not talking about the fundamental form of choice that all human beings have just by being human beings, since prisoners have that too, but some sort of political or social 'freedom'...which amounts to what of significance in the long-term?

Since those two attributes also mark the difference between living and merely surviving...

This much we are in agreement on, except that it's a very specific kind of choice, i.e. choosing each action with examined and affirmed purpose, that makes the difference, not the freedom to go shopping or attend a political protest or whatever privileges a typical 'citizen' gets...

Let me put it another way, most people find the idea of rest homes horrifying, even with the prospect of unlimited TV and no responsibility. Just rotting away in a chair or bed, waiting for life to finally end. Appealing right? Just imagine being stuck in one while in the prime of your life, and not just when your ability to care for yourself is in question.

I don't need to imagine - that's the reality of everyday modern life for most people, and has been in some measure at points in my life too. The emptiness, purposelessness, and loneliness that pervades one's existence, exacerbated by living unreflectively, all just becomes more obvious with rest homes (maybe the same could be said for prisons).

Hell, at least for me, TV would make it even worse. Constant reminders of the things I will never be able to do.

I was being a bit facetious about the TV thing - personally can't even stand watching TV 99% of the time because of all the stupidity that consistently flows from it, and it's only a form of sociability in the broadest sense.

Still, I'm wondering what these 'things to do' are that are so amazing they can't be done without fairly easily.

If you had an overarching purpose to your life, then chances are you went to jail in service of that purpose, and you can at least take solace in that knowledge, and you likely have others sharing your purpose that you can still communicate with - depending on what your purpose is, you might still be able to pursuit it in some ways from jail.

Quaxar:

On the other hand in a scandinavian prison for example, which has a far better environment inside, an actual focus on rehabilitation and a more accepting society once you get back out surely the greater mercy is letting that criminal serve his time and reintegrate.

Yes, but this person isn't going to be released. He is getting life or the death penalty.

Depends fully on what kind of person we are talking about. I know several who would not mind being locked up if they could spend their time creating art, for instance. I can not possibly speak for other people, and as for myself, I still prefer Imprisonment, since I can, as above noted, create art.

Well, if both methods remove the human in question completely and utterly from society, that is if the imprisonment is solitary without any contact to the outside world, death would seem the better option. The exception to that would be if you had somethings you wanted to complete, like a book and a work of art.

As the imprisonment becomes less severe, it also becomes easier to mitiagate and we now have to consider a myriad of factors.

But in all honesty, the concept of "mercy" really doesn't work if you phrase the question like you do. Mercy is about not causing unnecessary pain or suffering, and if it is somehow necessary to completely remove a human being from society (by death or imprisonment for life) then you are already out of options to mitigate suffering.

TWRule:

Heronblade:
choice and purpose

Even the most downtrodden among free citizens have some measure of the above two attributes, even if they are not taking advantage of it. Long term prisoners have nothing of the sort.

You perplex me, my friend. How many people can honestly say they have a real sense of purpose in their lives, beyond survival and making themselves and/or those near them comfortable (or something vain like 'leaving their mark on the world')? I certainly haven't met more than a handful such people, anyway. I'm assuming you're not talking about the fundamental form of choice that all human beings have just by being human beings, since prisoners have that too, but some sort of political or social 'freedom'...which amounts to what of significance in the long-term?

Perhaps instead of choice I should have said control. Every aspect of a prisoner's life is determined by others, from when they sleep to what they wear. The only practical difference between them and slaves owned by a harsh master is that the "owners" in question don't usually get to put their "property" to work.

Yes, in many cases, free men don't necessarily have much in the way of control either. But they always have that option of changing their life, again, even if they do not take advantage of it.

TWRule:

Hell, at least for me, TV would make it even worse. Constant reminders of the things I will never be able to do.

I was being a bit facetious about the TV thing - personally can't even stand watching TV 99% of the time because of all the stupidity that consistently flows from it, and it's only a form of sociability in the broadest sense.

Still, I'm wondering what these 'things to do' are that are so amazing they can't be done without fairly easily.

If you had an overarching purpose to your life, then chances are you went to jail in service of that purpose, and you can at least take solace in that knowledge, and you likely have others sharing your purpose that you can still communicate with - depending on what your purpose is, you might still be able to pursuit it in some ways from jail.

Heh, not bloody likely, at least in my case. I'd need a dedicated team of talented engineers, near exclusive access to a set of powerful computers with very very expensive software, and a very large and well equipped work shop to build and test prototypes among many other things in order to accomplish my overarching goal. Frankly, I'm going to have a tough enough time managing to pull it off while a free man.

But aside from that: caring for children, enjoying nature, finally finding a woman I am willing to spend my life with,
even the little things such as solving a challenging problem, working alongside my peers, or being greeted by an anxious pet when I get home.

No single one of the above items or their ilk are things one cannot necessarily live without, but such details are extremely important nonetheless. Living life without them is a lot like permanently losing your sense of flavor. The food you eat may still do its main job of providing nutrition, but all the satisfaction and enjoyment you once could get out of it is no longer attainable.

Glongpre:
This is really bothering me for some reason and I need some clarification. Keep in mind that this does not consider any monetary issues, purely moral.

I was reading the Castro thread and the amount of people saying that they wanted him to be tortured in jail are many posters. Now my issue is that I always believed people were against the death penalty because they wanted to be merciful. However, reading the Castro thread has made me question if jail is just an illusion. I mean, that confinement is meant as a cruel punishment disguised for the people shouting to stop the death penalty.

Humans are social creatures and thus any kind of confinement would be very painful mentally. So basically what I am asking is if the death penalty is more merciful (which I think it is).

(Bonus question!)If so, what does this say about humans?

EDIT: The person is 100% guilty.

First of all prison IS! torture, no other way about it ... not the inside politics and the fact that some physical harm might happen to you, it's when you get locked up and have nothing to do but stare at a cieling for 23 hour bangup, when the screws on mad power trips behave like such ***** that all you're left with is brewing homicidal thoughts while you're locked up. the food kinda sucks .... some days it's awesome.

considering how long it takes people to recover from a long prison sentence, you could argue that it's a fate worst than death, some people re-offend on purpose just to get sent back to what is now the only thing they know, there are just straight up suicides after perhaps months or years of mental anguish.

we're animals in the end of the day and if you're locked up in a tiny cell for up to 5 years you'll get the same mental damage as the ape who no longer wants to leave the cage or something along those lines.

when friends have come out of prison it always takes them at least a month of acting weird before they start to become themselves again and these are short sentences.

Alot of things in human societies are obsolete and the lack of willingness to change these things is going to hold us back for a long time.

Death can be merciful. Euthanasia is death and the point.

Prison, even for life, can be merciful too, if the regime is light enough and the alternative (ex mob lynching) is still worse.
Both options remove the perp permanently, so the only considerations are cost, utility and appeasement of the public.

Heronblade:
Perhaps instead of choice I should have said control. Every aspect of a prisoner's life is determined by others, from when they sleep to what they wear. The only practical difference between them and slaves owned by a harsh master is that the "owners" in question don't usually get to put their "property" to work.

Yes, in many cases, free men don't necessarily have much in the way of control either. But they always have that option of changing their life, again, even if they do not take advantage of it.

I'm interested in what sort of 'change' this is though. Can't someone have a profound self-transformation while behind bars and come to find meaning in their existence, even in the daily life of a prisoner? It hardly seems like the end of the world, in any case. Sure, there will be suffering, but it's not worth giving up on life over, and certainly not something we can allow the institution to sanction indiscriminately on some blanket notion of 'mercy'.

Heh, not bloody likely, at least in my case. I'd need a dedicated team of talented engineers, near exclusive access to a set of powerful computers with very very expensive software, and a very large and well equipped work shop to build and test prototypes among many other things in order to accomplish my overarching goal. Frankly, I'm going to have a tough enough time managing to pull it off while a free man.

If you don't mind my saying so, this sounds like the kind of thing that, if you don't accomplish it, you can rest assured that someone else will probably do it in your stead, your peers for instance...Not really a "the entire meaning of my existence hinges on this" sort of thing.

But aside from that: caring for children, enjoying nature, finally finding a woman I am willing to spend my life with,
even the little things such as solving a challenging problem, working alongside my peers, or being greeted by an anxious pet when I get home.

No single one of the above items or their ilk are things one cannot necessarily live without, but such details are extremely important nonetheless. Living life without them is a lot like permanently losing your sense of flavor. The food you eat may still do its main job of providing nutrition, but all the satisfaction and enjoyment you once could get out of it is no longer attainable.

Are these epicurean delights, even taken together, so important that you'd entirely lose your will to live if you didn't have them? It may not be 'the good life' in prison, but at least it's life.

Having to be separate from loved ones I would treat separately from the rest of the things you listed, and that I can understanding being very hard. However, there is also a sense that those people are with you even when they aren't physically (and some prisons allow them to physically visit you too, or at least communicate with you). However, again the question was whether death was 'more merciful' than life in prison. Personally, it would just seem like a betrayal of my loved ones if I opted to be killed rather than spend life in prison. That's really cutting off all relations with them, when I didn't really have to. Maybe some families would want their loved one to die rather than stay in prison, but it would have to be a pretty extraordinary case, I'd say, where such a thing made sense.

Glongpre:
This is really bothering me for some reason and I need some clarification. Keep in mind that this does not consider any monetary issues, purely moral.

I was reading the Castro thread and the amount of people saying that they wanted him to be tortured in jail are many posters. Now my issue is that I always believed people were against the death penalty because they wanted to be merciful. However, reading the Castro thread has made me question if jail is just an illusion. I mean, that confinement is meant as a cruel punishment disguised for the people shouting to stop the death penalty.

Humans are social creatures and thus any kind of confinement would be very painful mentally. So basically what I am asking is if the death penalty is more merciful (which I think it is).

(Bonus question!)If so, what does this say about humans?

EDIT: The person is 100% guilty.

The problem with this question, the problem with a LOT of questions like this, in fact, is that they, in a general sense, assume that all people are nearly identical, not only in behavior, but in physical and emotional needs. Throwing someone like Ghandi in prison for the rest of their lives would be different than throwing someone like Paris Hilton in prison for life, for example.

Not all people are built the same, and different people are going to react differently to different stimuli. I have a friend who probably wouldn't have trouble living in solitary confinement at all, by way of an example[1].

And, if you'll let me get up on my soapbox here for a second, that's part of the problem with our criminal justice system. Not everyone is going to learn that carjacking is NOT for shizzle, yo', just by being locked up for a few months. In fact, it's more likely that most people aren't going to figure out that lesson. You learn more from positive reinforcement, after all.

But getting off of that, I do genuinely think death is much more cruel, generally speaking. As long as a person can live, they can chose to redeem themselves, if not in the eyes of society, than in their own eyes. Death not only robs them of that, but also says that this person is, and always was, totally beyond redemption.

[1] Although it should be borne in mind that he's a 70 year old widower, and a Buddhist. I think.

TWRule:

Heh, not bloody likely, at least in my case. I'd need a dedicated team of talented engineers, near exclusive access to a set of powerful computers with very very expensive software, and a very large and well equipped work shop to build and test prototypes among many other things in order to accomplish my overarching goal. Frankly, I'm going to have a tough enough time managing to pull it off while a free man.

If you don't mind my saying so, this sounds like the kind of thing that, if you don't accomplish it, you can rest assured that someone else will probably do it in your stead, your peers for instance...Not really a "the entire meaning of my existence hinges on this" sort of thing.

Yes and no. I can be reasonably certain that someone will at least eventually start hammering out something based on a similar idea to any one of mine. But the phrase "if you want it done right, you must do it yourself", is particularly true in my field. Between the fact that:
1.) No two engineering projects are the same
2.) There are literally hundreds of advanced products and new production methods that would be incredibly beneficial to mankind as a whole that will not see general use for a very long time because the patent owners happened to be extremely greedy f*!#$&s.
I'm not particularly willing to just pass it on blindly.

Even with that aside, this is less about the action itself, and more that I want to be able to die knowing that I made a substantial difference for other people.

TWRule:

But aside from that: caring for children, enjoying nature, finally finding a woman I am willing to spend my life with,
even the little things such as solving a challenging problem, working alongside my peers, or being greeted by an anxious pet when I get home.

No single one of the above items or their ilk are things one cannot necessarily live without, but such details are extremely important nonetheless. Living life without them is a lot like permanently losing your sense of flavor. The food you eat may still do its main job of providing nutrition, but all the satisfaction and enjoyment you once could get out of it is no longer attainable.

Are these epicurean delights, even taken together, so important that you'd entirely lose your will to live if you didn't have them? It may not be 'the good life' in prison, but at least it's life.

That's exactly the problem. It is life, and nothing but life. It isn't even a matter of it not being a happy or "good" life. If you found and cast some kind of spell that turned the prisoners in question into slugs, mind and body, they would have MORE purpose than before.

Simple survival is tolerable if it is only a temporary state of affairs. Simply survive for all of one's life however, and one might as well never have been born as anything more than the simplest of animals.

For myself, I imagine I would prefer life imprisonment, and am generally against capital punsihment for a variety of reasons, mostly pragmatic ones over moral.

However, there is a circumstance in which I believe capital punishment should be used, and that is if the prisoner in question requests it. Though rare, you do get people who claim that they would prefer execution over a life in prison, and since the legal costs would be hugely reduced, they ought to be allowed such a fate.

Da Orky Man:
However, there is a circumstance in which I believe capital punishment should be used, and that is if the prisoner in question requests it. Though rare, you do get people who claim that they would prefer execution over a life in prison, and since the legal costs would be hugely reduced, they ought to be allowed such a fate.

The problem is that one of the reasons people request such things is often because they want to be seen as martyrs or to make a gesture to publicly promote a cause to which they subscribe, and I don't think that's what the justice system is about.

The logic of your position is comprehensible in view of the fact that prisons are horrible places which are extremely unlikely to have a positive effect on anyone, let alone the worst and most antisocial people. Thus, being in prison may be understood as nothing more than a punishment, but it shouldn't be and I don't think we should be moving towards a world where we just accept that as "good enough".

evilthecat:

Da Orky Man:
However, there is a circumstance in which I believe capital punishment should be used, and that is if the prisoner in question requests it. Though rare, you do get people who claim that they would prefer execution over a life in prison, and since the legal costs would be hugely reduced, they ought to be allowed such a fate.

The problem is that one of the reasons people request such things is often because they want to be seen as martyrs or to make a gesture to publicly promote a cause to which they subscribe, and I don't think that's what the justice system is about.

The logic of your position is comprehensible in view of the fact that prisons are horrible places which are extremely unlikely to have a positive effect on anyone, let alone the worst and most antisocial people. Thus, being in prison may be understood as nothing more than a punishment, but it shouldn't be and I don't think we should be moving towards a world where we just accept that as "good enough".

As a whole, I believe that prisons should be geared towards rehabilitation over punishment. All punishment does is to satisfy the human tendency towards revenge while alienating anyone in the justice system. Rehabilitation would allow a criminal to become a useful and valued member of society rather than just being a drain on the public coffer.
The voluntary execution thing I suggested may be limited in that their request would be granted by the court, so people asking for it out of a sense of martyrdom over actual preference would get turned down.

It really depends on the person you're forcing the sentence on.

Some have said "but it's death you won't care lololoolo epikkkk" but I was under the impression, that even if you're given the death penalty you're in jail for years anyway, even if you don't appeal. Not sure about that so could be wrong.

I'd imagine people who were scared of death would find that prospect pretty horrible. Sitting in a cell all day everyday until the time you're executed. Would probably be pretty scary.

Having said that though, I'd prefer death than life in jail, for various rather dark and edgy reasons.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked