Should a death row inmate be treated for an illness that would otherwise kill him?

Answer 1

5 cents, I feel your objection to treatment, but it falls under cruel treatment. Yes, while under the custody of the federal government even they are given rights as human beings. It would seem as though we could just allow them to fall dead, but under their constitutional rights, they are entitled to all available medical treatment you and I are.

Answer 2

I'm a little torn on this.... To not provide medical assistance is cruel... but to provide it.. umm sort of defeat's the purpose right? Think of the cop on the beat... is shot at, shoot's back.. inflict's what COULD be a killing shot.... they take him to the hospital.. fix him up.. just to try him and put him on death row... now how much sense does that really make??? Then again.. the crimnial is innocent until proven guilty....

I guess my stand on this would have to be this.. if the inmate has a terminal illness..... they are out of appeals...then nothing more than comfort measures.. if they make it to the date of they would have been sent to their death for their crimes.. then off they go... If not.. well then the tax payer's were saved a little money.....

If we are talking about something other than a terminal illness.. they yes.. they really should recieve medical assitance.. it is only right... No matter what they have done, we as a society should never stoop to or below their level.

I do believe in the death penalty.. but I have very specific requirement's to how and when it should be used... I would never want an innocent person to be sentenced to death... the criminal would have to not only confess.. but there would have to be irrefutable proof....

JMO

Answer 3

Every prison inmate has the right for a medical treatment if sick and the disease is killer one and has a cure. In most countries where capital punishment is in vogue, an unhealthy prisoner in a death row cannot be executed. Only a fit & healthy person can be executed. Else it amounts to double pain to the death inmate and human right violation if medical treatment is not given to prevent death from medical problems

Answer 4

If the patient (the prisoner) chooses to have the treatment then it should be offered to him. If he decides against it then he could receive palliative treatment to relieve his pain.

Considering the USA is a developed nation I still find it amazing that many of the idiots who live there support state-sponsored murder. Killing someone isn't going to bring your loved one back. In any case, surely it's a worse punishment to be kept alive for years and years in prison than to have the 'easy' way out with a lethal injection?

Good luck!

Answer 5

Yes. Because every human being is entitled to medical treatment when they are ill. By the way I'm totally against the death penalty.

Answer 6

No, but thanks to the liberals I think the average time someone spends on Death Row is about 27 years. You have a better chance of dying from old age than meeting "Ole Sparky" or getting "the Needle" that you were sentenced to receive.

It's really sad.....

Liberals view criminals as the only victim in crime.....

Answer 7

Yes-otherwise it could lead to additional pain and suffering. Too inhumane (relative to the inhumaneness of capital punishment in general.)

Answer 8

I do not think that thay should have any medical treatment on death row

Answer 9

yes. the state imposes a punishment & they have to carry that punishment out. the punishment is death by lethal injection, electric chair, etc - not to rot in prison awaiting their punishment. that's simply the legality of it, not my opinion of it.

Answer 10

i do no longer think it would help concerns tbh. It does no longer make the families of harmless people who've been murdered experience to any extent further useful or carry back their relatives contributors. in case you allowed this manner of ingredient it would make a mockery of the justice gadget and it would propose which you would be favouring a gadget of revenge quite of justice and punishment. In different phrases it would be carried out for the incorrect reasons quite of the your best option reasons. individually, particular i might additionally desire bloody revenge if absolutely everyone murdered somebody I enjoyed. i think of whilst it comes all the way down to it nonetheless i might choose the state to supply them a truthful trial after which if or whilst they're got here upon responsible of homicide to be positioned on dying row then carried out by the state using in spite of is the prevalent approach at that think approximately that state for capital punishment. in case you went to 3 sort of revenge based gadget wherein you allowed the sufferers families to be executioner, there is then an extremely skinny line between in basic terms skipping the regulation of the land altogether and in basic terms extracting revenge your self which might carry approximately anarchy and chaos, tit for tat revenge assaults. it extremely is suited to enable the state handle the regulations of the land consisting of capital punishment no longer persons, sufferers families and relatives etc. i do no longer think we ought to consistently act as choose, jury or executioner if we've vested involved, it would be carried out by independent human beings in accordance to regulation, and by the state. i'm British and help capital punishment for capital crimes. I additionally desire to be certain the repeal of the Firearms substitute Act here interior the united kingdom to permit regulation abiding voters to legally preserve themselves using in spite of potential needed consisting of a handgun. The regulations rushed by after the Dunblane bloodbath on the back of public sentiment and emotion have not labored and characteristic in basic terms suceeded in constraining the regulation abiding from with the flexibility to legally own a gun to preserve themselves and their abode, sources and relatives. on account that this illogical regulation has long previous by we've seen a great enhance in violent crime and gun crime and now in contemporary Britain it sort of feels in basic terms the criminals are people who posess weapons and characteristic loose reign to do in spite of they want.