Gringo

These three categories of felons are the worst. If they are not put to death, they should get life-long or nearly life-long, harsh prison sentences. However, if they repeat their crimes again in the penal system or upon release, they should certainly be put to death.

JL

I think 1 and 2 should be punishable by death, not out of revenge but because this type of crime seems to me the worst display of complete indifference for human life and dignity. I would not trust these people to ever be released into the general population nor do I find there lives to be worth perserving behind bars. I guess it boils down to whether or not the destruction of their lives represents a threat to the general public's feelings of empathy, some say the death penalty brutalizes.


3 is more of a gray area for me, there's a whole myriad of situations in which one may be considered a murderer. I do believe as with rapists the worst offenders should be subject to the harshest punishments by the same reasoning.

rebelnerd

In all cases, if the particulars warrant it, death. If not, since it's not my obligation to support them, let them earn their way through hard labor. Get rid of the notion that one should not commit suicide. If they find their lives at hard labor unbearable, let them commit suicide. In my view, these individuals gave up any claim to soft treatment, when they injured and/or killed others.

As in all things, I don't think every situation is completely black or white. Consideration should be given to extenuating circumstances. But in the most violent criminal acts, no mercy is due the criminal.

Filo

Joel

But isn't this one of the large problems with our current criminal justice system? There is no certain method for determining whether someone will commit a similar crime again. Considering the impact on the victim of the first two crimes mentioned, isn't it better to make sure the offender is permanently removed from society? How do you explain to a child's parents that the piece of filth who raped their child had been incarcerated before but he was let out because he was deemed 'fit for society' again. I personally would prefer to see rapists and child molesters executed, but pick any method you please. Just keep them out of society.

[ August 11, 2002: Message edited by: Joel ]</p>

rebelnerd

Edited to remove duplicate post.

[ August 11, 2002: Message edited by: Filo Quiggens ]</p>

JerryM

This may sound like "A Clockwork Orange," but funding is really needed to study (humanely, of course) violent offenders. If we can understand the neurobiology of violence, and sociopathy, and how some people lack impulse control, we can deal with it much more rationally. This is not to excuse it--criminals must be confined and controlled and should make restitution as much as possible--but we perhaps could better predict who requires life long incarcertion and who could be successfully rehabilitated.

AtlanticCitySlave

They should be killed.

Friar Bellows

Well, I think that there are grey areas in all 3 cases.

I think that violent criminals need to be seperated from non-violent criminals. That is, a guy who steals a car does not belong in the same prison as a guy who rapes a six-year-old child. We could even have intermediate prisons for those in the grey area between violence and non-violence. In addition, corporate criminals should be placed in the same prisons as non-violent criminals. There is no good reason to seperate criminals based on their social class.

Jamie_L

Well, if we knew with 100% certainty that laws would be enforced accurately and fairly, then the death penalty could be appropriate for these crimes.

However, since we know that laws cannot be enforced 100% accurately and fairly, and we can never know with 100% certainty if someone is guilty of a crime, I do not support the death penalty.

I have yet to be convinced that there is a need for the death penalty that outweighs the risks. As a rights-based conservative, I believe the government should be given no power it doesn't need. It doesn't need the death penalty. Same goes for more exotic, torturous punishments.

So, life in prison without parole is the order of the day for prisoners that can never be allowed to walk the streets.

Jamie

DMB

There is an element of doubt, occasionally a large one, in most convictions. We know that miscarriages of justice occur, and therefore I am against anything irrevocable such as execution, castration or amputation (as practised under some islamic regimes).

Taking away someone's freedom is already a huge punishment. I don't agree that very harsh conditions should be heaped on top of that, unless the convict commits a further crime while in prison, and even then the punishment should be proportionate, administered as a result of a fair trial and not be carried out indefinitely.

It is true that if someone close to me were savagely raped or murdered I would feel like cutting the offender into little pieces, but civilised societies depend on people eschewing personal revenge in favour of justice administered in the name of the whole community. Most of us are rather glad to live in a society where we are not subject to arbitrary arrest, torture or lynching.