all cells are three foot by three foot. no windows, sound proof walls, the inmates never leave the cell. no visitors no communication to anyboyd other than themselves. they only get rice, some vegetables and water only what is necessary to proper nourishment. those who get the death penalty, they may have the choice between killing themselves, or only allowed water and no food until they starve to death.
2006-10-21 18:17:01 · 12 answers · asked by noki 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
yall say this things like something is not that bad. i think the solitary confinement is a good idea, maybe not the rest of it. if prisoners would have to sit in a cell for a few years without no outside contact, repeat offenders would go down and the rest of crime. just to respond to another answer, innocent people, for one, it is going to happen. and two, that is a problem for the trial, prosecution process problem, not the punishment phase.
2006-10-21 18:40:56 · answer #1 · answered by noki_chaos 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only crime I can imagine that is horrible enough to justify that kind of cruelty is suggesting that kind of penal system. But you don't need to be imprisoned to experience it. With the Asker's point of view, s/he lives in such a hideous reality that it's punishment enough. The electric chair would be too great a kindness for someone who asks a question like this.
2006-10-22 01:35:39 · answer #2 · answered by beast 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes vote, for the type of cells as specified for right penalty.
2006-10-22 01:21:23 · answer #3 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i am going to answer your question ..by asking one...when did the u..s start treating our bad guys in prison better than they take care of our vets....i do not think this code will pass,..but maybe it should..better care for our vets...and throw the book at the ones that are sucking america dry..housing..a/c /school//all med and dental...god help us if we offend a criminal...his rights have been violated.....put them back on a chain gain and make them want to get out..and never go back...hey..being a robber/rapist/muderer..your better taken care of
2006-10-22 01:34:37 · answer #4 · answered by clcschiller 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not me...I wouldn't give them the option of killing them self...too easy. I actually love Kevin's idea of flogging that would surely stop some of the more minor offenses being committed.
2006-10-22 01:23:28 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Not me.
Actually, for somewhat minor crimes, I'm in favor of bringing back flogging. Does it make sense to incarcerate drug users, petty thieves, drunk drivers, etc?
You can bet if you string them up and give them 10 - 25 lashes based on the severity of their crime, with 100 lashes promised for a repeat offense, there will be no repeat offenses.
2006-10-22 01:20:49 · answer #6 · answered by Uncle Pennybags 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Why are you so angry?
Although you may feel a person deserves this sort of punishment if it affects you personally, or if it is a crime against a child or another person, it is not humane.
2006-10-22 01:39:01 · answer #7 · answered by D 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
i think that should be done for child molesters, and maybe some of the worse criminals put in solitary for a short period. that would make me go crazy...
2006-10-22 01:21:01 · answer #8 · answered by dino143637 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Just couldn't go for it. Some prisoners are wrongly convicted. others are victims of circumstance. we should treat them humanly. But just humanly not luxury hotel.
2006-10-22 01:24:50 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Give Bush time, and you might get to occupy one of your cells.
2006-10-22 01:29:04 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋