Death Sentence VS. Life Sentence

[Gothitelle.]

Neather should exist in my opinion. Im for someone doing time for the crime but people can be rehabilitated. It's horrible to put someone away forever without them seeing their family etc. If that would be, I'd be miserable. (that goes for those stupid 120 year sentences)

I abhor the death penalty because it's inhumane to kill someone over killing someone. Two wrongs don't make a right and killing of a human being is wrong, no matter how it's done.

 

[cazzler]

In my opinion, A person should get the death sentence for taking another life for sheer entertainment or own stupid purpose. Life sentence however, I believe should be on people like drug dealers/smugglers, etc.

But it's the other way round in real life so I've heard... :P

 

[インフェルノの津波]

Well there's more to life than just washing dishes, Triforce. I've only went to jail once, so I don't know about prison. You have to ask someone else.

I don't like either. Both are just horrible. In Life, until you die the Gov. has to take care of your needs, since they can't starve you. You have clean clothes, pretty good food, hey wait a minute this sounds better than my current life!

And in Death, you're not given the option to live anymore. Excuse me, but how the hell do you decide someone just dies? Even if they're a murderer, there are plenty of reasons on why they killed that person, or they weren't in a correct state of mind. (Though that's the case for most crimes actually, so I can't use that.)

All in all, the Justice System still needs some work. If those are the only two options to the most severe crimes, then someone is not using their brain correctly. Maybe back then it worked, but right now, it's not.

I mean come on we used to chop people's heads of, if we didn't change from that there wouldn't be as many crimes, true, but instead we would be tiptoeing around the fringes of the law!

 

[Asrossk]

Life Sentence. Economically it's a lot cheaper than the death sentence due to no legal issues. A life sentence also allows the criminal to suffer and live with the guilt of their actions for the rest of their life. Life means the criminal can also try and come to terms with what they have done.

A life sentence does what it says, it takes a person's life. When you leave prison 20 years later, you will have lost a huge amount of chances and experiences. Life also can provide reformation, and gives someone somewhat of another chance.

Death is the easy way out; the criminal will have no guilt to live with and will be given no second chance in any form.

 

[Captain Fabio]

Not so different. You're going to die anyway.

Wut?
There is a difference between natural death and intentional death carried out by the law...

Personally, I am not a fan of the death sentence, mainly because I think the offender should have the rest of their life, if serious, to think it over and live with it instead of just getting 'the easy way out'.
You might think that is a strange term to use with the death sentence, maybe it isn't, we don't know what is after life for certain, but if someone killed a loved one of mine, I would want them to rot in jail for the rest of their life.​

​

 

[Alley Cat]

Both are extremes, and neither are good. The death sentence, though, is the one I have to disagree with. They wont get to realize what they did and/or feel guilt about it. They'll just die knowing they got caught. Easy way out.

A life sentence? They'll spend time thinking and considering about their actions, choices etc.

 

[dante1w]

Personally, i'm against death sentance. People have to be trialed and punished in this world, but no one has the right (but god of course) to choose who dies and who doesn't !!! If these are the oly two choices, a life sentance makes a lot more sense, and that's for two reasons:

1- No one is god !
2- Like you said, a life sentance is harder, so why is a death sentance given to the worse crimes ? Better yet, why should it be given at all :(

 

[The Nightmare]

I think death sentance and life sentance are the same but the difference with life sentace is that you stay in prison forever and death sentance is you get killed but I think llife sentance is worst.

 

[Oryx]

I'm completely against the death sentence. :x There's been plenty of times where after someone was sentenced to life in prison, they ended up being released because there was new evidence that exonerated them. How many people died without even being guilty? You can't turn back on that. You can't just say "loljk, my bad" and revive them or something, and like someone else said above me, our justice system is far too flawed to say we're even close to 100% correct on all of our cases.

If the death sentence was removed, there is such a thing as life without parole. As far as I know, a life sentence isn't just "go away for life", it's a set of years that happens to be longer than a human lifespan. If the time is set long enough, then there is no chance of parole. Even if it didn't exist now, if they took the death sentence away they could easily implement that in its place.

There's also the question of who really deserves the death sentence. Murder, yes, of course people would agree, a life for a life. But is that all? What if someone tortures someone else, cuts off parts of their body, scars them mentally and physically for life but doesn't kill them? What about a man raping a woman, leaving her unable to have a normal relationship with a man for the rest of her life? What about a repeat child abuser/molester? Where's the line between "he deserves to live" and "she deserves to die"? I don't believe that that's a judgement we should be making, that one crime is worth a person's life but another isn't.

 

[Gymnotide]

While life-for-a-life is immature at best, the death sentence is necessary to prevent severely dangerous individuals from harming others further. There's no use in trying to meditate the mentally unsound in a life sentence, even in asylum.

 

[Nick]

I disagree with the death sentence, but I understand its purpose. I don't believe that anyone should have the power to determine if someone should live or die. Life sentences, I believe, should be more forceful and should only be thrown out to those who damaged the life of another being beyond repair. Taking away their child, killing their spouse, raping them, etc. Rather than allowing people with good behavior to have parole, and allowing them to be bailed out with something as useless compared to life that is money, they should be confined to the cell for their life with no hope of regaining what they once had before they took the life of someone else. It's a life sentence for a reason.

 

[Gymnotide]

I disagree with the death sentence, but I understand its purpose. I don't believe that anyone should have the power to determine if someone should live or die. Life sentences, I believe, should be more forceful and should only be thrown out to those who damaged the life of another being beyond repair. Taking away their child, killing their spouse, raping them, etc. Rather than allowing people with good behavior to have parole, and allowing them to be bailed out with something as useless compared to life that is money, they should be confined to the cell for their life with no hope of regaining what they once had before they took the life of someone else. It's a life sentence for a reason.

Devil's advocate: I know it's no excuse to kill, but I feel like a lot of life sentences are pretty futile because the people didn't have anything to begin with. It's not justification for the death sentence, but invalidates the life sentence as a "punishment" (as you describe) and merely makes it permanent lodging with free food and room & board.

 

[groteske]

Agreed with whoever said the death sentence was the most efficient method of eliminating a problem - if only it was as efficient in practice as on paper, as death row inmates sit for years before execution. I gladly advocate the death penalty. This is why (emphasis mine):

Source

The legal profession is bound by its ethics to offer the best defense for a defendant charged with mayhem, yet it is a perversion of forensic physicians' and psychiatrists' mission to focus on the patient only, especially when that patient threatens society through wanton destructiveness and violence. There are persons beyond the scope and reach of modern behavioral sciences' ability to rehabilitate, persons of twisted minds and deranged habits of gratification. Three Suffolk Court cases depict such individuals. Fred, convicted on two counts of rape and first degree murder, was put on work release and escaped from prison, committing a similar rape and murder within 1 year from his escape. Tests revealed him capable of responding without signs of schizophrenia and put to question why he was permitted to go on work release. Gunner, after spending 16 and 18 years, respectively, in prison for two grotesque murders, was charged with a similar murder 18 months after his second release. Finally, Buck committed a murder after a history of violent behavior. This case illustrates how determinants of mayhem can be in evidence through observable repeated acts and that a permissive approach can lead to homicidal acting out. Seven references are cited.

Rehabilitation DOES - NOT - WORK, except in very unusual and sparse cases. There are exactly zero registered sex offenders that have been successfully rehabilitated. With few exceptions, prisoners in life or on death row are habitual offenders. They're not going to contribute meaningfully to society. With the improvement of society in mind, why let them drain our resources when there is very little chance they will reciprocate?

Lifers, well, they're just a waste of resources, particularly capital. Prisoners aren't going to "think about what they've done", are you serious? To whoever said that, that mindset should've stopped at f---ing grade school. If you're motivated to commit a violent act serious enough to be imprisoned for it, you've likely got a set of recurring psychological issues to boot.

 

[Mentalii]

I'm in a country where there isn't the death sentence, and I it's unfortunate.
Criminals end up being released after a while, or even if they aren't, the jail is not as horrible as it seems. Ok, it isn't a fantastic place, but they have the TV, sometimes acces to hygien, bookcase... They just deserve the worst !

When I hear that all of those infamous killers will spend their lives there instead of dying, I think it disgusting !
Besides, they may be satisfied, to be just jailed despite their actions.
And, imagine yourself into the shoes of the family. For example, someone killed your brother, or sister. You... You just want the murdered to die ! Not to be just imprisoned, it's totally unfair after what he did, he deserves the worst, not being in a place where he can watch TV and playing video games !

 

[Gymnotide]

I'm in a country where there isn't the death sentence, and I it's unfortunate.
Criminals end up being released after a while, or even if they aren't, the jail is not as horrible as it seems. Ok, it isn't a fantastic place, but they have the TV, sometimes acces to hygien, bookcase... They just deserve the worst !

When I hear that all of those infamous killers will spend their lives there instead of dying, I think it disgusting !
Besides, they may be satisfied, to be just jailed despite their actions.
And, imagine yourself into the shoes of the family. For example, someone killed your brother, or sister. You... You just want the murdered to die ! Not to be just imprisoned, it's totally unfair after what he did, he deserves the worst, not being in a place where he can watch TV and playing video games !

Again: Though punishment is supposed to "punish," it's a silly thought to actually employ legal mandates as a form of remediation. There's no solace in putting a murderer in jail or taking his / her life in exchange. While there's a part of everyone that wants a criminal to suffer for his / her crimes, that's not what punishment should aim to achieve at all; punishment should be there to protect the surviving population, not as a mechanism of vengeance.

 

[Mr. X]

Personally, I think they are both a waste of resources and/or loss of resources.

Now, we have ourselves a criminal who kills someone. Death sentence. We kill him Hows about we sedate him and remove his organs for use in life saving transplants? Seems fair, he kills one person and now his parts will be used to save 5 or more people. After all usable organs are removed, he gets a massive overdose of sedative which will put him down painlessly.

Same thing for life. Person kills another person, he gets life. Lets turn all these life prisoners into blood supplies for the blood banks. Drain safe amount, drain safe amount again as soon as it is safe to. Again, seems fair. He kills a person and now he will be used, until the day he dies, to help save countless amounts of people.

 

[lollypop1997]

Life sentence is worse...being with other criminals and getting sick and everything for the rest of their life,isn't death better?i mean its bettter to die then to be with a bunch of criminals for the rest of ur life.Whats the point of living if ur not free and u'll never be

 

[twocows]

How about letting them choose? I would rather serve out a life sentence than get the death penalty, and would prefer if I was ever in that situation that I wasn't put to death because "Winter Wonderland" and "lollypop1997" thought that it was a fate worse than death. I'm sure others might disagree, so let them choose their fate.

Not to mention that there's an appeals process most people with life sentences can and do go through. I'd rather take my chances, thanks.

 

[Mr. X]

How about letting them choose? I would rather serve out a life sentence than get the death penalty, and would prefer if I was ever in that situation that I wasn't put to death because "Winter Wonderland" and "lollypop1997" thought that it was a fate worse than death. I'm sure others might disagree, so let them choose their fate.

How about them not doing something that would warrent the death sentence in the first place?

Just don't murder/rape someone and you won't have to worry about Winter's and Lolly's opinions.

 

[twocows]

How about them not doing something that would warrent the death sentence in the first place?

Just don't murder/rape someone and you won't have to worry about Winter's and Lolly's opinions.

If you think the only people that get the death sentence are people who have done a crime, you are incredibly naive.