Death penalty and Life in prison. Which is more barbaric?

[Norsefire]

Inmates still make valuable contributions to society. I would much rather have life in prison than the death penalty. I guess I'd just rather be alive than dead. I think you can still give life meaning even if you are confined to a prison. But you adapt, you make friends, life is different but you move on.

However, the question is, should they "move on" and "make friends", while their victim rots in their grave?
Life in prison is almost exactly the same concept as the death penalty: a permanent removal of a person from society. The death penalty is just more efficient, whereas life sentences result in wasted supplies, food, water, resources, etc

For people wrongly convicted, a life sentence is certainly not as bad as a death sentence, since the injustice can be reversed.

Which is the only saving grace that walks a very thin line. They could just as easily waste their entire lives in there, as Syzgyz said.

However, this discussion is more about how both of them share the same concept, and thus are equally barbaric or equally civilized. In fact, prison could be more barbaric. It's like enslavement, imprisonment, treating people like zoo animals, etc, followed by eventual death as a prisoner.

Absolutely barbaric.

Allowing their government to kill its citizens is a mistake of the historically ignorant.

Criminals are not "good" citizens.

Or are you against the government doing anything at all to punish criminals?

All the proponents of capital punishment specify conditions - that the convicted be actually guilty, that only certain crimes committed in certain ways be liable, etc - that are not found in reality.

Which of course is exactly the case with any sentencing. As madanthony said, we try our best to ensure that the guilty are indeed guilty. Mistakes are made, and it is unfortunate, but we try to improve the system.

They also invoke justifications - that the criminal deserves punishment equivalent to their crime, that the victims or their relatives have a claim on vengeance, etc - that are profoundly impossible or irrelevant to the situation.

How so? The victim has more rights than the criminal. At least, they should.

Also, again, this is exactly the case with any sentencing, regardless of the punishment. Life improsenment is almost the exact same thing as the death penalty.

Even the most ardent Statist must recognize that no government can enact vengeance, or determine what a person "deserves" in this sense.

Yet they do, all the time. The government gets to decide how many years a person deserves, or life, or execution.

If life in the government's prison is barbaric, that should be changed. Meanwhile, barbarity has nothing to do with allowing governments this kind of power. Safety and common sense do. Governments kill in cold blood, and they kill for their own reasons, inevitably.

However we cannot look at it as only killing. You have to look at the circumstance. The government is not killing innocent people and out of cold blood: that would be murder.

The government is punishing someone for their crimes. This is not murder.

 

[Betrayer0fHope]

I voted death penalty because there's always the chance that the justice system failed and there's an innocent man who got life. Dead innocent men doesn't seem too great to me :shrug:.

 

[Norsefire]

I voted death penalty because there's always the chance that the justice system failed and there's an innocent man who got life. Dead innocent men doesn't seem too great to me :shrug:.

We are speaking of barbarism here. The death penalty is no more barbaric, if not less, than life in prison.

 

[11parcal]

Not only is the death penalty more humane then life in prison it also costs the government less, if they're gonna die anyways why not do it quickly? I hear euthanasia is painless whereas suffering in prison is not

 

[Norsefire]

Not only is the death penalty more humane then life in prison it also costs the government less, if they're gonna die anyways why not do it quickly? I hear euthanasia is painless whereas suffering in prison is not

Exactly.


The thing is (and I want all of you anti cpers to answer this): if someone gets life in prison, why not just execute them? It'll save room and supplies:shrug:, and they're going to die anyway

 

[ThatOneAsian247]

Plus effects taxpayers pockets a little less. We already spent money to get the criminal in jail why pay even more to keep him there? With "execution" the money is saved and in a sense justice is paid... with less money involved

 

[Norsefire]

Plus effects taxpayers pockets a little less. We already spent money to get the criminal in jail why pay even more to keep him there? With "execution" the money is saved and in a sense justice is paid... with less money involved

Exactly

 

[shorty_37]

Not only is the death penalty more humane then life in prison it also costs the government less, if they're gonna die anyways why not do it quickly? I hear euthanasia is painless whereas suffering in prison is not

Ok, they make jokes about this, George Carlin in particular. It brings up a valid question though.
Why do they swab the prisoners arm with alcohol before they give him the lethal injection? What is the point of that? It's not like he is going to get an infection, he is going to be dead in a few minutes. :shrug:

 

[ThatOneAsian247]

Safety First I suppose?

Or maybe just the view of it all. Doctors swab the area in which the shot will be placed to prevent infection? Or does it also because the procedure seems more professional to show that care is taken. They don't want it to seem like an execution is sloppy. Criminals are still humans even for what they have done. Swabbing gives them the pleasure of the little bit of civility left before death.

Plus it looks better to the public showing that they are injecting like a trained Doctor would not like a heroin addict.

 

[Norsefire]

Looky there, where are all those anti-CPers?

Ah yes, they realize that I am right.

Life imprisonment is barbaric, not to mention no better than the death penalty. If someone is going to be stripped of their freedom and condemned to die as prisoners, why not just execute them? It's basically the same thing.

Why not make all life sentences death sentences?

 

[11parcal]

I am in favor of that idea however i doubt it will happen because, despite the logic in execution as opposed to life in prison, life in prison looks better.

Execution all around makes the government look evil, it makes it look as though they're taking human lives, and the public doesn't want to see that, it shakes their faith in the government.

 

[ThatOneAsian247]

Faith is always wavering in the government.

It is just a matter of who is questioning the government

Death penalty or life sentence. Either way people with be shaky with their faith in the government so I say take the easiest way out on the pocketbooks... plus the government should worry a little more on other things then their appeal to the public on the topic of whether criminals should live or live in a cell

 

[11parcal]

I agree, but try telling that to a politician.

 

[ThatOneAsian247]

Give them enough money and they will listen

Everything is fueled by money.

 

[Cybernetics]

only one is an efective punishment on the person, they cannot feel punished after being killed this it is less barbaric, on the otherhand most prisoners are released, sentence be dambed before they die

 

[Norsefire]

Look at the results: it looks like life in prison is more barbaric. Or at least no more barbaric than the death penalty. In fact it's more barbaric because it keeps the prisoners alive to suffer, and condemns them to die as prisoners.