For those who don't like the idea of sentencing a person to death what about a sentence which is so introverted many would choose death over being incarcerated? They will be put in a small cell with no contact to the outer world (no letters in or out, no visitation, no phone calls), given a sparce amount of food twice a day and will not be evacuated in the event of a natural disaster. Please speak your opinions or suggestions here:
2007-11-15 13:26:10 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Sociology
I like Texas law! If there are 3 crediable witnesses to you killing someone you go to the front of the line! An I know most rapist and people who have abused a child are labeled jail bate.
2007-11-15 21:40:27 · answer #1 · answered by brenda f 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My argument against this is the same as it is for Capital Punishment: that experience would be so awful that it would not be worth it if a single innocent person ended up experiencing that for any length of time. Considering how many innocent people have been freed from prison due to DNA testing in the past ten years, I think it is sad that anyone would consider doing this to a person, even someone who deserves it. Sounds great until YOU or someone you know is the one falsely accused and convicted. Personally, I'm not willing to take the chance just to get revenge on someone, even if the likelihood is low of me getting falsely tried. It's not 0%, and that's a fact.
Besides, it is clearly unconstitutional. Before you get all in a huff about the "stupid Constitution," consider this: if you negate one aspect of the Bill of Rights, then you essentially call into question the entire Constitution. No Constitution, no freedom or democracy for the rest of us. It seems like a good idea, but the philosophical and idealistic complications of this are staggering.
If none of that convinces you, then consider this: terrorists, dictatorships, and third-world countries execute prisoners. The civilized world looks down on all these people. Do we want to be categorized with the terrorists or the civilized world? Truth is that we are. Saudi Arabia. China. Libya. Iran. North Korea. That's pretty sad company to keep.
2007-11-15 13:41:04 · answer #2 · answered by Mr. Taco 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
~Gee, at least your medieval dungeon would have saved the lives of the several hundred wrongfully murdered innocent inmates who have been executed in the last couple decades. Kill for peace and justice I say, and let the innocent be damned. It's a small price to pay for the preservation of a just and free enlightened society.
Come to think of it, we use capital punishment all wrong. If it is meant as a deterrent, it should be used for the crimes and criminals where the most recidivism occurs. That would be speeding and shoplifting. Let's go back to hanging starving 14 year olds for stealing a loaf of bread. Yeah, that's progress! Not to worry. A couple more neocon congresses should get us there. Especially when the next Georgie the Younger gets to appoint the next couple of Supreme Court Justices. Iraq is starting to look like the land of the free and the home of the brave what with drivel like you're spouting.
2007-11-15 14:18:04 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Damn. Steve P stole my answer!
That's a pretty cold sentence.
I think we should bring back the guillotine. Quick, relative painless, and the sight of your uber tough bro' from the 'hood doin' the funky chicken without his head may be a real deterrent.
2007-11-15 13:40:24 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
i think they call that being married
2007-11-15 13:30:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋