Its funny that you say that discomfitting, because most prisoners fight hard to have a life sentence instead of the death penalty. Is there really any logic that can disprove this. Would you surrender the right of life just because you disagree where you have to live it? Lets be honest, prison is heaven compared to some places.
Discomfiting* & Prisons are very inhumane and there are a lot of statistics. There's a really good book called "Are Prisons Obsolete?" by Dr. Angela Davis. It's a really good and you might learn something. Orange Is The New Black is not what a prison really is at all, by the way. "Let's be honest, prison is heaven compared to some places." Yes, this is not really news but just because it's better than one place doesn't make it humane or good.
Don't just say "I think" and assume things. Go read some books on it. Aileen Wuornos, for an example of one, is a person who is widely known as the female serial killer. Wuornos aimed to get death penalty, not life in imprisonment. "Are Prisons Obsolete?" is a book you really need to read because this doctor states all the facts, personal experiences and statistics about how and why they are obsolete and inhumane.
I'm sorry, but I don't even need to look anything up here. You should talk of reforming the prison system, and not forced executions. And if what you say has any merit, then it would be the prisoners choice.
What education do I need. I don't need to go out and get your book to provide a contention. So far, you only rebuttal has been "read the book. What am I to gain from that? I gain that you have no formal opinion of your own, and your argument is not strong enough to refute me. Saying that I'm unwilling to educate myself is both stupid and an ad hominem, and I think you know better.
The way prisons are becoming more and more privately owned since the 1980's meaning that they're for-profit so now they need criminals to keep their funding creating them become inhumane and corrupt. Maybe the way that after prisoners who don't get life are released, they generally end back up in prison or they end up on the streets. Or even the natural way that prisons won't work no matter what reform is done. Most prisons don't even work to begin with; this is a fact. The time you can say they worked is when the individual actually wanted to change and was able to which generally isn't what happens. But if somebody has life imprisonment with no chance of parole, they have virtually no chance of being looked at for a possibility of parole or a lessened sentence. This is not only USA; this is all over Europe, Africa, South America- the world. Prisons are inhumane and don't work and that's been proved. Look around. National crime rate goes up as the national number of imprisonments rise; it's pretty simple to understand. Prisons don't work, they cause more crime and destruction than they do help. On the fact aside from being inhumane, it's a drain on the innocent public. Despite the private prisons rising, the public sects are rising also. Prisons use tax payers money, I'd rather not have my money be fed to rapists, serial killers & criminals; I'd rather have my money be funded to schools and things that are productive. Prisons aren't about helping people or helping the prisoners, they're businesses that only want money; that's why they're called prisoners and not "guests".
Great, but this still does not answer the question. Why would prisoners be better off dead then alive in inhumane conditions? Why can't the death sentence be the prisoners choice? Why can't we simply reform the system, rather then execute prisoners? You seem to be arguing everywhere other then the core, and all my arguments have been dropped so far. Answer these questions, and this discussion could actually lead somewhere.
Because the criminals in prison, aren't the ones who are paying for their food, health, education, ect; it's all the public. It's not inhumane to the criminal, it's inhumane to the public for them to pay for it and private sect prisons wouldn't fix it because they'd be for-profit and the system would end up failing due to the constant need for imprisonment instead of rehabilitation.
So you think the cost of life is subjective to the size of our wallets? We are only as valuable as the money in the treasury? I'm not sure I can share your philosophy. The human life is a beautiful thing. A blank canvas, that no matter how much it was painted on, can always be painted over. Are you saying that rehabilitation is impossible? That the human mind is an ignorant creature, with no chance at recovery? Try to enlighten me on why you believe in such things.
Human life is a beautiful thing when you are not harming an innocent life. Why should people who commit no crimes and are productive parts of society be obligated and forced to pay taxes to feed, house, protect. Educate, ect for prisoners that will be their? I don't believe that rehabilitation is impossible; just prisons are impossible to get rehabilitation to work. Some are mentally ill with schizophrenia or some disorder that plays a role, are thrown into prisons; they should be put in mental institutions where they do usually get help. But only if they want to, medication won't fix it all. Some are just gangbangers who don't care and asap they'll just go back to want they did before. And very few actually end up able to make some type of lifestyle other than selling their bodies, being a hobo, becoming a drug addict or ending back up into prisons. I've had a friend who committed second degree murder where chronic delusional schizophrenia played a major role; he was sent to a prison. He will not get help there but he is not in life there. He won't get help because of two reasons; 1.) he doesn't want help 2.) he is not in access to help.
Once again, I'm left asking you my original questions. We have already deducted that you believe in rehabilitation, but not in prisons, correct? If so, then why don't you agree to my original question. Why don't we reform the system, rather then forcibly executing prisoners? Your original point was the system was inhumane, so they should get death rather then live through it. So, haven't things got a bit hypocritical. If some prisoners value life more then death, and would rather live through the inhumanity then die, then are we not committing an even more inhumane act? It appears your points often contradict each other, and you have lost touch with your original resolution. I suggest you come back after organizing your thoughts more clearly, and finding a more situated resolution.
In what ways? In what ways has it become impossible to provide the simplest of aid and support to our fellow man. Is the person facing mentally conditional problems? Then we can provide him with therapeutic aid. Is the person's crimes stemming from a medical condition? The we can give him medicine. Or, maybe are conception of what constitutes a death sentence is difference from what is truly moral. People were killed for things that seem normal to us today, a long time a go. Who are we to say that are decisions are always correct? Could we be sending a great man to his death over are limited knowledge of the human condition? Ask yourself these questions before jumping the gun on such a serious topic. The human life is not a joke. Executing someone is a serious matter, and only a fool would take such a valuable thing from this world without proper judgement.
Interesting conversation.... Jif, I really appreciate your arguments here, you bring up some very eloquent questions, you're on point! Discomfiting, I'd like to read that book you mentioned, sounds fascinating. To butt in here, it's my opinion that in general justice systems (not talking about prison systems) worldwide are severely, severely flawed, and until we come up with a foul-proof way of convicting ONLY the guilty, throwing all life-prisoners into the excitation chamber seems barbarous. Further, I believe that almost ALL crime can be prevented by society taking a more proactive role in providing a stable environment, education, and mental health help (when needed) to children. The majority of criminals are not insane, but products of their environment, and we need to come up with better ways to protect those at-risk individuals starting at a young age. That's the most humane course of action.
I agree with you Vensura, Jif is on point. One comment discomfiting made stood out, "They are naturally flawed" That is a really bold statement with no reliable evidence to back that claim. Also, you are blanketing all types of prisoners as if they are all mass murdering sociopaths. A lot of prisoners are non-violent offenders. Lifers may be of the mind set as say a cancer patient who has been told they are going to die, they have hope. They hope there with be a cure before that day, they hope a miracle from God will occur, they hope they outlive the expected 'date'...As does the lifer in prison, he hopes the law may change, he hopes rehabilitation may come back, he hopes his mistake may help a troubled kid. Not everyone who makes a mistake is a throw away, look at history and many great leaders have checkered past and found redemption, and what a shame to us all to have lost that contribution due to a "kill 'em" attitude?