Thread: Death Penalty
View Single Post
(#25 (permalink))
Miranda_'s Avatar
Miranda_ (Offline)
Forums Administrator
Site Admin
Posts: 151,388
Join Date: Dec 2004
Rating: 46 Votes / 5.00 Average
Default 11-16-2007, 12:39 PM

Originally Posted by alabamablonde13 View Post
As unfortunate as it would be to lower ourselves down to their level of sickness, if it would save innocent's lives, it would probably be worth it. If America would give criminals harsher punishments for their crimes this country might be a better place to live in.

I would be a bit more satisfied with the old English way then what we have now though.
It would not save people's lives. It's a fact that a lot of serial killers are created, not born; if there was a way of telling who these people were before they killed, then that would save lives. Here's some facts for you:

FACT: Several serial killers were abused as children, either physically or sexually.

FACT: Several serial killers were given blows to the head.

FACT: Cruel prison treatment has created at least one remorseless killer.

I've read Carl Panzram's autobiography, and the harsh treatment he received in prison certainly contributed to the deaths of the men he killed. Treat these people harshly and cruelly, and we show ourselves to be no better than them. No, they do not deserve the same rights as the free people; but neither does that give us the right to treat them worse than animals. Being kept in solitary confinement; being flogged and then doused with icy water; being treated with appalling cruelty will only create more Panzrams.

Better to give out a humane death penalty, after a short time in prison with one appeal allowed. The death penalty in England, in the last few decades of its use, was as perfect as it could be made. No-one ever died of old age in the condemned cell; neither did they suffer on the end of the rope or whilst in prison.

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote