What Would You Do???

Question

If you alone held the choice as to whether your child's murderer would receive life in prison or the death sentence, what would you do?

Lock him up?
Throw the switch?

How did you come to your choice?

How did you reach your decision is better wording.

Answer 1

Lock him up, no one deserves the death penalty. We're better than that.

Answer 2

..I'd rather they be locked up and never, ever free again (and hope no earthquake ever frees them all). But I go back and forth, sometimes, to me, it depends on if he'll be let out after some time, to murder someone else's child, which happens, unfortuantely a lot.. At that time, I am more concerned, I guess, with the safety of the innocent (children) than the safety of one who made the choice to take and abuse and murder a child.. Yes, I go back and forth.. I'm not for the death penalty, but yet again society seems to be degenerating.. so I have to wonder if political correctness is the best way to deal with crime (or terrorism, for that matter) - Sometimes I'm more concerned with the right of people to be able to walk down the street without being raped, murdered or blown up.. than the rights of those posing the dangers.. [figuring they made their choice, and give no choices to their victims.]

Answer 3

The 'death penalty' must be done away with... because it sounds bad. In its place, we should implement 'Retroactive Birth Control' (RBC).

The rationale for this is the idea that considering the heinous nature of the perpetrator's offense, his mother would surely wish he had never been born. RBC merely fulfills that desire retroactively. Ideally, the sentence would be carried out by administering an injection, or a pill of come kind to the offender's mother, after which he would be chemically reabsorbed into her body... reversing the birthing, gestation and insemination processes. Unfortunately, though, in recognition of the fact that science is not yet up to such a challenging task, we would be obliged to simulate the desired effect by cruder methods... stoning, filleting, burning at the stake, poked with sharp sticks by the village women, nibbled to death by ducks... or any number of imaginative, horrible... and memorable (think deterrent)... methods. Afterward, the remains would be processed, and fed to the offender's mother, bit-by-bit, over the course of the next month or two.

There are a couple of obvious problems with the death penalty, as it is implemented today:

1. The standard of guilt (beyond a reasonable doubt) is such that innocent people are convicted and sentenced to death. In such capital cases, guilt should have to be established BEYOND ANY DOUBT before invoking 'Retroactive Birth Control'.

2. It takes too long to get carried out. Under the plan of 'Retroactive Birth Control', once guilt has been established 'beyond any doubt', the guilty party would be frog-marched out the back door of the courthouse, hurried along by cattle prods, and the sentence would be carried out immediately, on the premises.

Answer 4

If you were to choose death sentence would you be able to live with yourself?

I am not in your position and I don't know how it feels. But allowing someone to just disappear in a death sentence is to easy. When that person goes you are still left with all the pain and suffering of the whole ideal. (sorry to say this) But it will not bring back your love-one.

Better if you give them the life in prison so that you can heal and that person can come to terms and feel the pain of what they really did. Forgiveness always begins with yourself.

If you have lost a love child. I pray that God gives you rest and healing in this difficult time.

God Bless.

Answer 5

That's a hard choice. I don't know that I am comfortable with the idea of my tax dollars supporting this nothing of a human. You know 3 hots and a cot rule. But death, makes you think how this thing came to such an act of coward is.
You must really have to be done with yourself and just don't have the guts to pull your own switch. So do the cruelest thing and let society take care of the choice. Which ever way we choose this bastard still had his way.

Answer 6

Depends on the circumstances but I'd probably go for the death penalty simply because I couldn't stand the idea of him sitting in prison able to get a "free" education, 3 meals a day, drugs, free gym time and whatnot at the taxpayers expense then getting out early for "good behavior".

Answer 7

the DEATH sentence

cuz if he received life in prison, he will be tortured, yes, and maybe even become crazy, but if he received the death sentence, he would go to hell immediately and torture there is like a million times more than any torture on earth

MaY ALL MuRDereRs NeVer ReST IN PeAcE

Answer 8

Death sentence for sure. Why keep a killer of children alive, fed, and housed at the tax-payers' expense? But I also feel that the punishment should fit the crime, and the killer would be executed in a painful way in order to deliver true justice, in my opinion.

Answer 9

Death sentence.

People sometimes get let go after 20-30 years, because of lack of space. I wouldn't want them to ever be near a child again.

Answer 10

Lock him up. He will suffer more if you allow him to live, maybe he'll become some body's ***** in prison. Death would be an easy way out.