If you were murdered in cold blood how many years in prison would you want your murderer to serve?

Question

Or would it be the death penalty?

Ha Ha! I'm laughing my *** off reading the answers that say "You'd be dead so couldn't decide" you're sooooo funny!!

Answer 1

I'm 100% against the death penatly and life prison sentences so no to either of those. I'd say 10 years in prison and involvement in programs to rehabilitate and help this person.

Answer 2

in cold blood? what without mercy? as apposed to murdered nicely? A slightly leading question.

Assuming that they could catch my murderer, who would have to be cleverer than me (and would therefore be uncatchable). Assuming also that they catch the right guy. I'd give him life in prision then randomly free him after 20 years with no social skills whatsoever and a zimmer frame.

I can't recommend the death penalty because that's revenge not justice and also it's my belief that once you are dead you are dead so he wouldn't have time to think about what he had done to the world's nicest man (me). The first two assumptions are also so huge that we couldn't rule out a mistake.

Granted, a country without the death penalty decends into utter chaos within five minutes with people getting gibbed by boat anchors left right and centre. Whereas a country with the death penalty such as the US is a paragon of social virtue with an extremely low homicide rate where everyone is so scared of getting caught for murder that it hardly ever happens.

It's the certainty of punishment that is the deterent NOT the type of punishment.

would you do anything that would certainly leave you in a windowless box for 20 years? Or would you be too scared of a vague chance of death IF you get caught?

can someone help me down from this horse?

Answer 3

But why do you all say the death penalty? Does it bring you back? No. Does it give your family more solace? No, unless the guy actually threatened your family, too. Does it help to curb violence in society? No, it just makes it worse -- violence begets violence.
And how many people who said death penalty are religious? What do you care -- you're in your Heaven, or Nirvana, or whever you go when you die.
And "and eye for an eye" was specifically rebuked by Christ, over and over and over again, as he taught the Jews that rigid adherence to that "law" (which was the best that that primative society could muster) wasn't God's will.

Answer 4

If my murderer was ninety years old and sentenced to life, he may only serve five years. If my murderer was eighteen and sentenced to life, he could, in theory, serve seventy years for the same gravity of offence. (lets forget, for the sake of argument, how soft the courts can be) That seems to present us with a moral conundrum. I don't believe in the death penalty, so that ones out. The other problem I have, is that, I might be ninety or eighteen when the murder is carried out. So, I could be deprived of, say five years of remaining life, or, possibly seventy years. The answer would seem to be, that old people should only murder old people, and young people should only murder young people. Otherwise, they would have to be smacked daily with a wet kipper, to make amends.

Answer 5

You should visit the websites of Murder Victims' Families for Reconciliation and Murder Victims' Families for Human Rights for another view.

Also, the recent hearings in New Jersey on the death penalty
included a couple of witnesses who lost family members to murder and who, in principal, believe in the death penalty. They understand that the capital punishment appeals process is needed to make sure an innocent person is not executed but it keeps reopening their wounds so that they have ended up opposing capital punishment.

Answer 6

No to the death penalty. It doesn't deter other criminals, nor does it bring me back, it doesn't save money, and they might have the wrong person.

The average murderer serves 14 years in prison. I'd want the murderer to spend time in prison until we were sure that they wouldn't do it again in the outside world -- if that means that they're dead, then so be it.

Answer 7

Not the death penalty, but life without possibility of parole. Dying takes a few minutes. Living 30 or more years in jail with no hope of ever leaving, then getting sick and being confined to a hospital ward in the prison, then finally dying with no loved ones or friends at your side - ah, now THAT'S punishment.

Answer 8

I will say if you were murdered or anyone they should stay in jail until they die of old age!
I don't agree with the death penalty
but no computers or TV for them
only books etc
no treating them like its a holiday home or a school
make them do a good days work
punish them for their crime
that is what jail is for to punish them not to rehabilitate them
that is just a crock

Answer 9

Wow what a good question!

I believe anyone who murders in cold blood should go to prison until they die. Prison should be a cell with only a basic toilet, bread and water, no tv, no games, no perks. It should be a punishment and a deterrent.

A life for a life (and none of this human rights c**p)

Answer 10

I would think losing 20 - 30 years of their life would be sufficient. The death penalty is nothing more than government sanctioned revenge killing and I would definitely not want to be the reason for that happening.

Call me crazy but I believe in a persons right to make up for their crimes.

Answer 11

Minimum 20 years or my life expectancy minus my current age, whichever is longer. Whatever amount of life that was taken from me should be taken from the murderer, with a minimum of 20 years punishment.

Death penalty if I was murdered in a heinous way and the person has no possibility of social redemption.