would you support it if there was no suffering by the prisoner - like if they got an injection of morphine just before dying and died with a smile? or is suffering a big part of the death penalty? Does it make you happy to know they suffered?
How do you feel about the 8th ammendment?
2007-04-27 14:41:01 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
There has to be an ultimate punishment for ultimate crimes. Yes, I support the death penalty.
Us being a civil society, I prefer we use the method that does not create un-necessary suffering, even by the punished. Either way, the end result is the same. He/she will be dead. If he didn't suffer the same way his/her victims did does not really matter.
The amendment prohibiting unusual and cruel punishment, in my mind, refers to deliberate torture. That is, pain and suffering being the object of the method, and possibly the enjoyment of the public. (which is true in some middle eastern countries - even today.... public stoning is still practiced)
I feel, certain amount of pain and suffering from current death penalty method, is not cruel and unusual punishment, but simply a by-product of the punishment itself. After all, the convicted did cause death to one or more victims. He is not entitled to an absolutely painless care.
2007-04-27 14:57:15 · answer #1 · answered by tkquestion 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I would support the death penalty even more if there was some intentional suffering immediately before death.
I'd like to see the families of victims getting a chance to kick the dirt bags in the gonads several good times just before they stick the needle in.
2007-04-27 14:54:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have nothing to gain by a prisoner's suffering, and have no wish to see someone suffer, no matter what they did. To me, the death penalty is appropriate when someone has done so much harm to others that they have effectively forfeited their right to live. Their continued existence costs money, and they have forfeited their right to that expenditure by the things they have done to hurt others. When that happens, putting them to death is, to me, the simplest way of knowing that they will no longer be around to harm anyone else, no matter what happens. Suffering is not necessary for this to occur, and I do not advocate making a person suffer during the execution process.
2007-04-27 14:50:58 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The eighth amendment mentions cruel and unusual punishment. 'and' is a conjunctive meaning the phrase is valid only when both elements are valid.
ie if the death penalty is not unusual then the alleged cruelty is irrelevant.
As capital punishment from colonial times to now has been most familiar with the people of the United States then it would be hard to bring an argument that it is unusual.
2007-04-29 13:03:27 · answer #4 · answered by Edward Carson 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I usually have mixed emotions on the death penalty
First because I do not think that it is mans right to take
a life (any life)
Then I get so ticked off with these criminals that have committed horrendous crimes such as murder, especially young children, that I feel like they should shoot him now.
As long as the death penalty is still legal I ask how cruel
and unusual was the punishment of the murder victims.
I have to go with my first feeling though, I don't really like
the death penalty.
2007-04-27 14:51:54 · answer #5 · answered by justgetitright 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I say the death penalty needs a little upgrading or downgrading depending on your view. I think a rapist/murderer should have the same fate, or a serial killer that liked to torture, they should be done the same way that they took the life. Wether it is ran over, stabbed, burned, raped, smothered, or even drowned. They knew what they were doing and they should see how it feels, not by some random undertaker, but by the family of the victim. Anyone with me on this?
2007-04-27 14:51:40 · answer #6 · answered by Josh B 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
They inject you with a powerful sedative that is probably a million times stronger than Morphine.
Sodium thiopental: to render the offender unconscious.
Pancuronium/Tubocurarine: to stop all muscle movement except the heart. This causes muscle paralysis, collapse of the diaphragm, and would eventually cause death by asphyxiation.
Potassium chloride: to stop the heart from beating, and thus cause death: see cardiac arrest.
Just a bunch of muscle relaxers.
2007-04-27 14:48:02 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Fifth Amendment says that you cannot be deprived of LIFE, liberty, or property without due process.
That being said, the Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment.
I personally don't care how someone's executed, just so long as they aren't tortured.
2007-04-27 15:15:00 · answer #8 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
True justice requires that the punishment fits the crime. If the victim/s suffered, so too should the perpetrator. True justice could never rightly be considered cruel, though it would definitely be unusual today.
2007-04-27 14:52:58 · answer #9 · answered by wcslaw1 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I honestly couldn't care if they suffered. It should be the quickest, cheapest, and easiest method possible. It should also be easy to clean up. I think they should just hang criminals sentenced to death and use the same rope over and over again.
2007-04-27 14:50:16 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋