If a person is convicted of a hideous crime and sentenced to death. If all the evidence is pointed to him and without a doubt he commited the crime, i say he should be killed right away in a slow painful process so he could suffer before he dies like his victim(s) did. Don't bring religion into this, because i didn't either.
2006-07-12 04:24:09 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Screw death row, let's use that money to better our education system.
2006-07-12 04:24:40 · update #1
HERE HERE, I Agree with what you have to say. What is it with lethal injections anyways. These people that do the crimes and are caught deserve to be put on the chopping block, not five years from now or even life in prison and forget about this pleading insanity crap, they knew what they were doing all along, anybody and everybody knows right from wrong, life and death.
Put the money towards education and not T.V.'s in the cell blocks. Hell they get three square meals a day their own room education whereas we have to work our *** off to try to go to college and make a decent living. Polictics is BULL>>>>.
2006-07-12 04:35:02 · answer #1 · answered by SGT M. 2 · 3⤊ 3⤋
We have a provision in the constitution against "cruel and unusual punishment." It is there for a reason. Sometimes, not often, but sometimes, all of the evidence points in the wrong direction. How many guilty verdicts and pardons have resulted from the "innocence project." These cases found false testimony, DNA evidence that was technologically impossible to process at the time of defense, and eye witnesses whose eyes deceived them.
I have heard people say that a few wrongful deaths are worth disposal of the hard core of maniacs convicted of the horrendous crimes associated with the death penalty. Pedophlia, mass murder, torture, murder of law enforcement officials, terrorism, all of these are horrible scars on the backs of humanity.
The questions remains does humanity scar itself by duplicating the behavior on the perpetrators that the perpetrators handed out to their victims. Does this make us as morally and ethically deficient as the persons who committed these crimes.
I think life imprisonment, with no hope of parole, is a just and reasonable punishment. However, I think that imprisonment for this type of capital crime should have absolutely no amenities. No visitors, no exercise time, no TV, no communication. If they have to give them something to do, let them work alone in their cells on projects that benefit the humanity they so cruelty abased., doing the work that no one else will do, every day for the rest of their lives.
This solution could serve a dual purpose, it would give jobs that no-one will take to people who have no choice but to do them and it will compensate a society for the deeds of the perpertrators. If they try to escape, shoot to kill immediately.
The best solution is a future solution. Exile on a prison planet where there is no escape and work that is beneficial to society. Both of these options leave open the miniscule chance, that should there be new evidence, or new technology that can clear a criminal of charges, they are alive to be cleared and restored to full citizenship. However, if guilty, their lives will be spent in endless agony of solitude and hard labor.
2006-07-12 11:46:06 · answer #2 · answered by Mary Lynn 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have a vengeance streak in me too and having studied a lot of Medieval history, I could think up some really interesting torture to put these people through, but we have a law against cruel and unusual punishment in this nation that must be respected. I think a nice public execution by firing squad or hanging would be okay with me. (Hanging isn't considered cruel because the knot in the noose can be set to break the person's neck when the platform drops, thus killing them almost instantly) This crap where we sedate people and give them a peaceful death when they've tortured and killed others infuriates me.
2006-07-12 11:36:06 · answer #3 · answered by Crusader1189 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
An eye for an eye. In the Middle East, someone who commits a hideous crime is very possibly going to die in the same manner his victim(s) did.
2006-07-12 11:28:10 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
See that's a tough question. It comes down to ethics and morals though so each person is different. If murder is wrong, then so is killing the murderer because essentially you are taking someone's life. It's a tough call especially in recent times when crimes seem to be getting more and more heinous
2006-07-12 11:31:50 · answer #5 · answered by Kyleen G 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Surprisingly, most people who believe in capital punishment are Christians. I have to agree though, when it comes to monsters like John Couey for instance, I say, let the victims family decide when, where and how.
2006-07-12 11:30:43 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know....even though that person did a lot of horrible things..I wouldn't feel good about myself if i had to be the one convicting him to a long and painful death...
2006-07-12 11:36:19 · answer #7 · answered by Susan 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The eighth amendment forbids "cruel and unusual punishment." that has been interpreted as requiring the fastest and most painless method of execution. it was intended to do away with the kinds of capital punishment once used in England as shown in the movie Braveheart.
2006-07-12 18:21:16 · answer #8 · answered by mattapan26 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I like my idea of dastrating all male rapists with a rusty hacksaw. I agree with a slow, painful death.
2006-07-12 11:36:17 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
this is in response to rfjanssen1......yes and no......i have read parts of the bible and it contains numerous accounts of the killings and rapings and ravaging of millions of people. so, what's your point?
2006-07-12 11:28:47 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋