Imprisonment for Life? A Viable Option?

[sisyphean]

The problem with life imprisonment is that it leaves brutal killers alive to kill again.

Hundreds of murders have been committed by those previously convicted of murder, and about half of these murders occur in prison.

Executing murderers saves innocent lives.

I agree that they need to be removed from society. But we have no right to take something away that GOD has given. They MUST be removed from society but cannot be killed without placing a blot on your soul. To support this is implicit acceptance of murder, since we cannot justly condemn something which is so clearly out of our domain.

Just to reiterate: we NEED to remove these people from society, but killing them is NOT, NOT, NOT the answer and can never be accepted.

americancatholic.org/Messenger/Apr1999/feature1.asp#F6

With love,

Geoff

P.S. Chesterton absolutely does rule.

 

[notself]

The problem with life imprisonment is that it leaves brutal killers alive to kill again.

Hundreds of murders have been committed by those previously convicted of murder, and about half of these murders occur in prison.

Executing murderers saves innocent lives.

When are you going to volunteer to inject the fatal drugs or pull the switch?

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

When are you going to volunteer to inject the fatal drugs or pull the switch?

I will volunteer if they need volunteers.

When will you confess your complicity to murder when a killer who you kept alive murders again?

Do you think fellow prisoners’ lives are worth sacrificing for your clear conscience?

 

[sisyphean]

I will volunteer if they need volunteers.

When will you confess your complicity to murder when a killer who you kept alive murders again?

Do you think fellow prisoners’ lives are worth sacrificing for your clear conscience?

There is a difference between doing your best to prevent something and having it happen anyway (keeping them alive but jailed) and actually killing someone (pushing the button/flipping the switch/whatever).

This sounds like you are trying to convince yourself you are on good moral ground. Good luck.

Sorry if that sounds glib, but its the truth.

Geoff

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

There is a difference between doing your best to prevent something and having it happen anyway (keeping them alive but jailed) and actually killing someone (pushing the button/flipping the switch/whatever).

This sounds like you are trying to convince yourself you are on good moral ground. Good luck.

Sorry if that sounds glib, but its the truth.

Geoff

Action or inaction that leads to innocent death is wrong.

Do you disagree?

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

There is a difference between doing your best to prevent something and having it happen anyway (keeping them alive but jailed) and actually killing someone (pushing the button/flipping the switch/whatever).

This sounds like you are trying to convince yourself you are on good moral ground. Good luck.

Sorry if that sounds glib, but its the truth.

Geoff

You seem to be missing a key point.

Hundreds of people, including security guards, have been murdered in prison because we don’t carry out the death penalty when appropriate.

 

[pnewton]

life in prison.

solitary confinement.
no tv.
no letters.
no visitation.
no books.
nothing to take your mind off why you are there.

basically living dead.

Regretfully, our courts have redefined the meaning of cruel and unusual to include most of these things. It is because of requirements mandated by case law that we will never be able to safely incarcerate some offenders.

 

[Lujack]

Action or inaction that leads to innocent death is wrong.

Do you disagree?

I agree. I think the risk of executing innocent people is far too high to actually employ the death penalty. We as a society are not capable of successfully implementing a death penalty that does not execute innocent people.

 

[notself]

Regretfully, our courts have redefined the meaning of cruel and unusual to include most of these things. It is because of requirements mandated by case law that we will never be able to safely incarcerate some offenders.

sources please

 

[pnewton]

sources please

None. Consider just my own expert opinion.

Actually I could quote Pelican Bay, California and how bare minimum contact with the outside allowed the Nuestro Familia leaders to order murder and run criminal organizations.

 

[notself]

None. Consider just my own expert opinion.

Actually I could quote Pelican Bay, California and how bare minimum contact with the outside allowed the Nuestro Familia leaders to order murder and run criminal organizations.

I would be interested in seeing a link to the information about Pelican Bay **linking minimum contact with the outside as the cause **of the Nuestro Family running of a criminal organization.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

I agree. I think the risk of executing innocent people is far too high to actually employ the death penalty. We as a society are not capable of successfully implementing a death penalty that does not execute innocent people.

Hundreds of people have been murdered by persons previously convicted of murder.

There is not a single proven case of an innocent man being executed in the US since the death penalty was reinstated.

Approximately 400-0.

How many is too many for you?

 

[pnewton]

I would be interested in seeing a link to the information about Pelican Bay **linking minimum contact with the outside as the cause **of the Nuestro Family running of a criminal organization.

The first google hit turned up this. I had the town wrong. It was Santa Rosa, not Sacramento.

mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n707/a04.html

Interestingly enough, I heard from that after they had broke the leaders up and moved them to separate federal prisons under similar maximum security precautions, they used the move to expand their organization into the federal penitentaries.

 

[LilyM]

Hundreds of people have been murdered by persons previously convicted of murder.

There is not a single proven case of an innocent man being executed in the US since the death penalty was reinstated.

Approximately 400-0.

How many is too many for you?

Innocent? Don’t know. Juveniles and people with severely low IQs - who should NEVER be subjected to capital punishment - absolutely.

 

[sisyphean]

I will volunteer if they need volunteers.

When will you confess your complicity to murder when a killer who you kept alive murders again?

Do you think fellow prisoners’ lives are worth sacrificing for your clear conscience?

Action or inaction that leads to innocent death is wrong.

Do you disagree?

I do not disagree. I also understand that many prisoners attack other prisoners. To the best of my knowledge the death row inmates are housed in separate facilities under solitary confinement conditions. “In Polunsky, prisoners are held alone in cells with solid walls and allowed out for one hour of solitary recreation in an empty room.” (Polunsky is a death row facilitiy). This would seem to preclude their ability to cause injury to anyone except themselves. There has been ONE instance of a death row inmate killing another in 33 years, I dont think that that sounds like very high statistics considering the rates of violence in the non-death row inmates. I have a friend in prison in texas right now. He is doing a term for dealing. His first night in the cell block his non-death row inmate attacked him and managed to break his arm. According to your logic, this cellmate should be put to death to prevent his harming anyone ever again.

I DO understand your point of view, I advocated it for many years, I have just come to understand things differently. Read Colossians 3:13 to understand somewhat:

“even as the Lord hath forgiven you, so do you also.” Forgiveness does not mean remittance of punishment, but it DOES mean that we cannot, cannot, condemn a man or woman to death. Who among us is not so laden with sin that we deserve death with the saving power of Jesus Christ? Carmen Pate said something in a devotional today that I hope I can use here “Forgiveness is not condoning or overlooking the wrong behavior of others, but rather it is freeing ourselves so that God can work mightily through us to touch their hearts for Him.”

We are called to love one another, saint or sinner, and putting someone to death is not love, regardless of the reason. A person can always be removed from society to prevent harm, but no man/woman/child has the right to condemn someone to die.

With love,

Geoffrey

 

[sisyphean]

ALSO:

ncregister.com/daily/dollars_and_the_death_penalty/

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

I do not disagree. I also understand that many prisoners attack other prisoners. To the best of my knowledge the death row inmates are housed in separate facilities under solitary confinement conditions. “In Polunsky, prisoners are held alone in cells with solid walls and allowed out for one hour of solitary recreation in an empty room.” (Polunsky is a death row facilitiy). This would seem to preclude their ability to cause injury to anyone except themselves. There has been ONE instance of a death row inmate killing another in 33 years, I dont think that that sounds like very high statistics considering the rates of violence in the non-death row inmates. I have a friend in prison in texas right now. He is doing a term for dealing. His first night in the cell block his non-death row inmate attacked him and managed to break his arm. According to your logic, this cellmate should be put to death to prevent his harming anyone ever again.

I DO understand your point of view, I advocated it for many years, I have just come to understand things differently. Read Colossians 3:13 to understand somewhat:

“even as the Lord hath forgiven you, so do you also.” Forgiveness does not mean remittance of punishment, but it DOES mean that we cannot, cannot, condemn a man or woman to death. Who among us is not so laden with sin that we deserve death with the saving power of Jesus Christ? Carmen Pate said something in a devotional today that I hope I can use here “Forgiveness is not condoning or overlooking the wrong behavior of others, but rather it is freeing ourselves so that God can work mightily through us to touch their hearts for Him.”

We are called to love one another, saint or sinner, and putting someone to death is not love, regardless of the reason. A person can always be removed from society to prevent harm, but no man/woman/child has the right to condemn someone to die.

With love,

Geoffrey

I don’t see this as a case of forgiveness. This is not a matter of an affront to me personally, it is a matter of deciding how best to protect innocent life in our society.

I understand your position, however.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Innocent? Don’t know. Juveniles and people with severely low IQs - who should NEVER be subjected to capital punishment - absolutely.

How many innocent people would an individual have to kill before you would support the death penalty for that person?

If you help to keep this person alive, do you share any responsibility for their future victims?

 

[Alexius]

I thought I would add some thoughts to this:

I am admittedly for the death penalty, but this is not the issue. To me, a determinate life imprisonment (life without parole) is a practical death sentence. The only real difference is how long it takes to end your life. By locking them up forever and throwing away the key, we avoid “pulling the trigger” on their life. Now, it has been pointed out that it can take 30 years or so to execute (the record from incarceration to execution is 33 years set by convicted murderer Jack Alderman), but for the lifer, it may take much more before they naturally die. My step-father’s great-uncle was sentenced to life w/o parole for murder in 1930 (he is thought to have killed up to 3 people) and he served most of his life until his sentenced was commuted in 1980 having served 49 years and 4 months. He died as a very lonely and poor man.

While I am for the death penalty, I am against life without parole. Why? Because I feel it is more cruel to lock someone up in a zoo until they die than to simply execute them. No one should have to wait anymore than 30 years to either be executed (shouldn’t take more than 5 or 10 years) or have a chance to get out. This may seem inadequate, but 30 years is a long time. That means for someone who was incarcerated in 1979, this year is their first chance to get out. If they do get out, they may find that some of their old clothes are coming back in style.

Basically, I think that it is best to give those serving longer terms every possible incentive to reform and get out. If they are too much of a danger or are not able to be rehabilitated, then they just don’t get out (like Charles Manson), but at least give them a theoretical possibility.

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[Le_Cracquere]

Innocent? Don’t know. Juveniles and people with severely low IQs - who should NEVER be subjected to capital punishment - absolutely.

Interesting. You contend, then, that the murderer’s age or mental capacity makes his victims less dead somehow?