Would it be unconsitutional if the government expired murders the same way they killed thier victim?

Question

I am so sick of the violence i hear on the news nowdays. More people are being murdered and it seems as though these criminals have no remorse about it. They are not concerned about being caught because they do it more often even in day light. I think the government needs to enforce firmer laws with these scum bags. The law should be that if someone kills another person whether it be second or first degree, that person should be automatcially sentenced to death in the same way they killed their victim. Maybe that would hinder these criminals from doing what they are doing and put fright in them. The same go for rapists and child molesters. They should be secluded in their own community amongst themselves forever. Not a prison exactly but maybe a town just for them where they have no contact with the public, EVER. Not even their family. They loose all their rights as a human being. I can go on but if the government had these laws, do you think crime would reduce?

i am talking about people who kill and rape children and women, shoot people in the head, throw people in the rivers, dismember bodies. These criminals should die the same way. They dont care nowdays about being caught, the people who they kill or hurt, the victim's family and their feelings. They are selfish and i am sick of it. The governent enforce these constitutional laws but the laws only work for the criminal not the victim. prisons are a joke. they still get three meals a day and probably a snack. they have play time or whatever, get to see thier family once in a while. watch tv. the only thing is they are secluded. What exactly is the punishment? what about the victim and his family? they dont get to have three meals a day. the victim's family can't see their loved one. They can't tell their dead loved one they love him.

and if they are put to death, they get a peaceful quick one. nice and easy and have the opportunity to speak with their family first.

Answer 1

Your first question: Yes, it would, unfortunately, be unconstitutional. However, I love the way you think. You second and last sentence was so profound, because it would definitely reduce crime. Look at that incident where caning an American in a foreign country got so much publicity when, in fact, that country uses that punishment on it's citizens for crimes such as graffiti, and they have almost no graffiti. So, strict discipline does work. When spanking your child became child abuse, our country began on a downhill road to gangs, and uncontrollable teens. Of course there is a difference between spanking and beating a child which would cross into child abuse, but it's ridiculous how radical pacifists have changed our country by simply making it a crime to spank your child. Sometimes, we cross the line in this country between freedom which our forefathers were so proud of, to being radicals. The terrorists will continue to use those radical pacifists to infiltrate us and destroy our freedom.

Answer 2

Well to answer your initial question...yes it would be unconstitutional. Seeing how are laws protect people from "cruel and unusual punishment" that is not going to fly.

Now on a personal level, I have often wondered the same thing. But then that would have to open up a whole new can of worms and legislation.

For instance: who would be the one executing the murders? (i.e. chopping people up, violent rape that results in death)--I mean really who is going to do that??? And who is going to want to work in a whole town full of child molestors and rapists??? (Meaning the prison guards, wardens).

A secluded island is an idea...but all crimes (even violent ones) are not equal. Is it fair to put a female who killed her husband in self defense on an island with a serial killer???

Plus some murders are accidental or due to self defense...you have to take those into consideration as well.

So in theory, would it be a good deterent? Possibly. In reality there are too many loopholes, and we have way too many more issues to deal with rather than overhauling the whole justice system right now.

Good question though.

Answer 3

Unconstitutional? I suppose it would be and that it would be cruel and inhuman treatment but what one has to do is look at the flip side of the coin. What is it for our victims? We live a life in torment that few can understand that have never been in our situations. It is true in 2014 that criminals have more rights than our victims, not to mention they actually have more rights than the people of this country. I agree that the Justice system does not work, I have lived it for almost 39 years now ( mine was a murder case).

I know that our country needs dire change, the laws in which cases and especially cold cases are dealt with in Texas need to be revamped. I am trying to find ways to bring this about, and hope I can.

If you really want a criminal punished for acts of violence that are by no way in doubt, then actually a victims family should have the say in which the criminal is pushed, but we do not have that choice, we depend on a jury of our peers, and hope and pray that they actually feel and can understand our plight.

Someone asked who would be the person to carry out the punishment? Honestly after living thru this for so long, I can honestly say, In my case I would gladly carry out the punishment I would deem fit for the murderer and I would have no remorse for doing so. In my heart and in my mind, I know I would be saving another person from the consistence of his criminal activities because he had spend from his childhood up thru adulthood making victims. This murderer is now HIV and I have no doubt if I could carry out a sentence on him I could save someone else

Answer 4

I've always felt the same way, but it would be really hard to implement. First, you would have to be absolutely sure they are the guilty party. And who would be the one to inflict the punishment, I know I wouldn't have the stomach for it. I think the true sociopaths who kill for the thrill (or whatever) should be put to death because they are so dangerous. They have no feelings of remorse. Some murders are crimes of passion (revenge for years of abuse, or avenging a loved one), which I personally, would show more mercy. Rapists and child molesters should be brutally punished. Unfortunately, with our system, it seems the criminal is the one with all the rights. The victim's life is either ended or ruined.

Answer 5

I believe the Bill of Rights protects against that. Cruel and unusual punishment is what it is called. Remember, vengance is not justice.

The laws are in place to protect not the guilty, but the innocent. Unfortunately that means that the guilty get a benifit too, but I would rather protect all the innocents charged with a crime at the expense of some criminals getting off rather than severly punishing innocents just to make sure all guilty get punished.

Answer 6

Your way would not reduce the crime rate that you are trying to reduce. For the punishment to deter the crime first the criminal must think about the consequences of his actions and know that he will be caught. In most of the murders the perpetrator did not think past the moment and surely did not think that they would be caught.
In your system if someone raped my daughter and I caught and killed him, you would have me shot, is that the justice that you want?
When we make laws we have to be very careful, our feelings can not enter into the equation.

Answer 7

Oh I am with you 110%. It SHOULD be that way but unfortunatley, I don't think it ever will, because it is "cruel and unusual punishment" and we can't do that to those poor crimianls! (rolling eyes now) Funny how no one ever seems to worry aobut the victim or the victims family or how many other lifes were touched, ruined, devasted, because of this CRIMINAL! They have too many rights and victims don't have enough!

Answer 8

That would be cruel and unusual.

The point of execution is not vengeance, but punishment and elimination. By their crimes, they have forfeited their right to live, so the only civilized thing to do is send them to their next incarnation.

But not by being brutal and cruel. I'd rather just be efficient. Hanging, beheading, or bullet to the brain work just fine, and don't require a lot of fancy equipment.

Answer 9

The problem is that if we kill murderers the same way, then that makes us no better than them. Even if we put them through a trial, if we kill them in the same grotesque ways it is admitting that we get some sick pleasure from seeing people die like that.
That is what makes us murderers.

If we gain pleasure from trampeling the rights of offenders, then our society has become no better than them.

Remember the Running Man?

Answer 10

I definitely agree with what you are saying but practices such as that would be unconstitutional on the grounds of being cruel and unusual punishment. I suppose if laws were changed to allow punishment like that it might change things, but I really think making changs like that to the justice system would really complicate our justice system and lead to longer trials and richer lawyers.