REGISTER TO REMOVE ADS
and along with all of the other things that have been said: life imprisonment isn't cruel if it is warranted. Criminals are forfeiting their right to a free life. You break the law you get punished. I think killing somebody is pretty damn close to forfeiting the right to life- therefore, life in prison.
I'm not Californian, neither do they give death sentences in my country, which I think is a good thing. When someone has commited a murder or so, he/she should suffer for the rest of their lifes for what they've done in my opinion.
Of course, I am speaking of jails and not prisons, but with overcrowding as it is (plus the process of transferring people from county jails to state prisons), not all murderers are in prisons right now.
The "fear factor" has slowly been watered down over the years, where we now give people a "comfortable, humane" death, instead of deaths that promises pain beforehand. Deaths such as the electric chair and hanging, where the people are made to suffer before death, are more effective in instilling fear than deaths that promise to be painless, such as leathal injection.Originally Posted by Aldrain
I think it should be rarely used, but when it is, it should be swift and clean. No drawn out crap, far less money drained into someone we're simply going to kill.
While I am against the idea that California is looking to get rid of the Death Penalty, Celtis couldn't have said it better. California hasn't even used it in a long time, so not like we're losing anything major. Vote for it and be done with it, I say.
The people on death row already made their choice. They chose not to be a member of society, and because of this I do not support the abolishing of the death penalty.
Good. Putting down another human for the death of another only increases the kill count. Does nothing. Just let them rot in prison and wallow in self pity, they are as good as dead that way.
Either remove the death penalty (which is already ultra-expensive) or install surveillance so intrusive and widespread that privacy doesn't exist anymore, so we can always be certain exactly who did what in relation to a crime (and all the other scary possibilities it opens up). I wonder which of those I prefer so that the USA doesn't have a broken legal system.
Death penalty or no death penalty, an innocent person can still be sentenced to prison by a jury and may never taste freedom again. If sentenced to death, said innocent person would have a buffering between the sentencing and the execution, as been pointed out. And should said innocent person be put to death, the brighter side is that they would no longer be suffering in prison. On the other hand, if there is no death penalty, said innocent person may spend the rest of their days in prison.
So when you get down to it, you have to ask yourself which is worse: an innocent person being put to death or an innocent person having to suffer in prison for the rest of their life? Because if sentencing a person to life in prison is supposedly the greater punishment over the death penalty, then so too would it be the greater evil to inflict upon an innocent person.