Check out what this death row inmate had to say:
"I know I'm not innocent," said Knight, who believes his appeals have been exhausted. "They think they're killing me. They think they're punishing me. They've already punished me. I've already had 16 years of punishment. They're releasing me. They're letting me go. That's helping me out. That's the way I look at it."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,277613,00.html
2007-06-04 05:32:15 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I don't really know which is more humane for the convicted. I know that what should count is what is best for society.
I don't view capital punishment as "punishment," per se, I view it as ridding society of a detriment.
And many people fail to realize that the prison guards, employees, nurses, etc., who come into contact daily with these people are part of society. They must deal with it and they take it home to their families, who must deal with it.
2007-06-04 05:42:31 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Many death row inmates have expressed similar views. People think that just because inmates get TVs and candy on occasion, U.S. prison is sunshine and lollipops. It's not. These men have to fear for their lives aside from impending execution; assault and rape are common occurances. If they mess up, they're often stuck in a box of a cell, lacking human interaction and privilage of any sort. This will break a psyche - it is often considered worse than death.
Execution is the easy way out. Of course, execution is not about punishment, necessarily - It's also about protecting the populace. Yes, life in prison protects us as well, but they are both viable options.
2007-06-04 12:47:31 · answer #2 · answered by Athena 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The death penalty can sometimes be more humane then life in prisonment with no chance of release. It depends on the individual. As long as there is hope the human spirit will carry on but when all hope is lost it dies. Life in prisonment is a greater punishment for most.
2007-06-04 12:40:31 · answer #3 · answered by Kenneth H 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who knows. There are good things and bad things about both. The problem here is that if even ONE innocent person is executed for a crime he/she did not commit and it has been proven so by DNA or other scientific methods, then that is one too many. The appeals are way too long and justice is NEVER provided. So who wins?
2007-06-04 12:46:27 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Possibly. I think life in prison would be alot worse than dying... but that's me.. The problem with the death penalty is that you can't reverse it. If one day evidance surfaces that proves someone was innocent. you can't take the death penalty back. There have been numerous instances of this happening.
2007-06-04 12:36:44 · answer #5 · answered by Louis G 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have read about this issue and I believe that supermax 23 hour solitary is pretty brutal. Its hard to say if the human mind can accommodate to it.
2007-06-04 12:36:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Life in Prison - 3 squares, fully inflated basketballs, weightlifting, a library, all at taxpayer expense - - - not too shabby.
2007-06-04 12:44:36 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
In reality, yes. BUT, if a convicted (and positively) proven guilty person was put to death in the same manner as their victims...I think we'd be on to something!
2007-06-04 12:37:22 · answer #8 · answered by 49erfan 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes. And the only thing wrong with the death penalty is that its not used often enough.
Vince
2007-06-04 12:36:44 · answer #9 · answered by vinny_says_relax 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Its more human on the tax payers who wouldn't have to waste tax dollars on pointless appeals and to feed and house someone who is clearly quilty.
2007-06-04 12:35:25 · answer #10 · answered by steinerrw 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋