Can anyone give me a GOOD reason why we give death row inmates a "humaine" death ? Clearly their crime was not humaine, so why are we treating them better than their victims...
Answers:
I couldn't believe someone was complaining about McVeigh having a "tear in his eye" and that meant the injection was causing suffering.. GODALMIGHTY!! Did it hurt as much as having to watch all those poor families bury their dead??
I can still remember the photos from Oklahoma City.
I think all these bastards should die exactly as their victims did, cut for cut, bullet for bullet, torture for torture. Then it's fair.
Because torture is wrong.
Because we are not barbaric like they are. Our goal is to remove the problem not inflict horrendous pain. To do otherwise makes us the same as the criminal.
this is the paradox of capital punishment.
we want to exterminate them, but we want to be civilized about it, so not to to 'stoop' to the level of the killers.
1. We don't live under the Taliban.
2. " Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
I've always wondered that myself.
Because we are not like them and society frowns on revenge as opposed to justice. We can't lower ourselves to torture and still call ourselves a civilized society.
I thought execution saved them from death by liver disease, AIDS, heart failure, kidney failure, or other fatal errors. I mean, after all the grim reaper gets us all eventually, right?
This way the inmate knows exactly how and when he or she is going to die instead of waiting out each day for death to slowly and painfully take their lives.
And this way they can leave behind a good looking corpse.
Otherwise, their crimes were not humane, but we, being civilized, like to think when we practice state-sponsored murder we are doing it in a way that causes the condemned to suffer the least pain of all.
I think at the very core? because we're better than they are.
I've toyed with the idea that a murder should die the way his/her victim(s) died, but then the person who has to carry out the execution would have that on his/her conscience.
It's difficult enough to take a human life, even that of a murderer, I think we dispatch them humanely for us, not for them.
Because they shouldnt be allowed to force society down to their level. They arent worth the time on anyones mind or the audience. Its best they are simply removed from existence without any acknowledgement. Thats the best. That is NOT to say that rapists and child molesters should not undergo complete castration and removal of sexual organs by way of a totally human operation that will leave them sexless. That is not torture or revenge. simple a way of preventing a future crime.
Because we want to prove that we are better than them and that we can show them some mercy unlike what they showed to their victims
Well, if you or someone you care about ever ends up in a cell somewhere, convicted of a capital crime they did not commit,
it's possible at that point you might think of a reason.
I agree. For that matter, why do we treat them better than patients? For God's sake, we put people to sleep with very similar drugs prior to operating on them. Most people whom I've talked with who were anesthetized during surgery never woke up or felt any pain during these very painful operations and most heart patients don't actual feel any pain when their heart is made to stop beating while they are given open heart surgery. If that's the case, I fail to see how it could be "painful" for death row inmates being executed if they are already anesthetized during the process. In fact, if we euthenize our pets, it should be MORE than good enough for murderers.
In any event, I'm with you. Who cares if they feel pain? They should feel pain. It shouldn't be a painless process.
WHEN A PERSON COMMITS THE CRIME OF MURDER, HE LOWERS HIMSELF TO THE LEVEL OF ANIMAL. BY BEING HUMANE , WE STAY A STEP ABOVE HIS LEVEL
I would love it if they suffered more, but the truth is that most of us aren't capable of causing that kind of suffering. No matter how much a person deserved to be tortured to death, I couldn't do it- but I could push a syringe with no problem.
I've gone back and forth on this issue more than once in my life and at the end of the day have decided the answer to "Death Penalty?" is "NO".
People tend to argue for the death penalty emotionally. They say to me "How would YOU feel if YOUR family were slaughtered? Wouldn't YOU want to kill these animals with your bare hands?" The answer to that is a no-brainer. Of COURSE I would and that is exactly why I am the last person qualified to sit in rational judgment.
PRO
The one thing in the death penalty's favor is that it is part of a social contract in which we trade personal vendettas, vigilatism, lynchings and other 'rough justice' for an institutionalized system that is arguably more impartial and therefore in theory, fairer. But still flawed.
CON
First, there is error in the conviction rates. Second, it does not serve to reduce crime. Third, it is more expensive to execute a criminal than it is to house them for a lifetime.
I believe society, and our governmental structure, ought to model the behavior we demand of our citizens and that includes seeking alternative resolutions to killing killers.
against the constitution and no one cares about the victims anymore or their rights its a shame and a pity... i would like to tie criminals to my car and drive across country dragging them behind. going about 5 miles an hour...
We don't wish to become as evil as they are. .unless that's your goal.
Because we have a president who is more focused on his daddy's revenge than on our society. I think that our country's budget cuts should begin with our death row inmates. F**k them, let them starve, rape eachother, cause disease among eachother. Lock them in and open it up when they have killed themselves or eachother......
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment