<p>Zapz: do you believe that the right thing is being done here?
[Luis</a> Garavito - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Garavito]Luis”>Luis Garavito - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>^ Just to summarize for people who don’t want to read that: he raped and murdered at least 140 children. Tortured them and slit their throats. He is suspected in up to 300 of these gruesome attacks. He cannot be in prison for more than 22 years, and may be up for parole in as little as 3 years because of good behavior. </p>
<p>That is absolutely disgusting.</p>
<p>“Yeah but technically the purpose of prison is to rehabilitate people who are eventually supposed to get out and if they’re in for life they’ll never get out.”</p>
<p>yes…where’s the problem, there? if you’re a rapist, you’ll always have the urge to rape. if you’re a killer, you’ll always have the urge to kill. 99% of the time. u can’t rehabilitate some one into growing a soul.</p>
<p>& as for that^. just horrible.</p>
<p>“Although the law should have better rules against this sort of thing, like people can’t be sentenced to the death penalty if there is any doubt as to whether they are guilty or not. They must be proven, without a doubt, to be guilty.”</p>
<p>i’ve thought about this sort of thing before, too. but, it’s like, that’s what’s supposed to happen when they’re sentenced, PERIOD. they are already considered 100% guilty, with out a doubt. idk, it’s all very confusing & complicated.</p>
<p>When people are convicted it’s because of a lack of “reasonable doubt.”</p>
<p>If you look at the link I provided about Juan Melendez, and if you look at the Innocence Project sites, you’ll find that there have been plenty of people given the death sentence or life imprisonment for crimes they didn’t commit. Police even coerced witnesses into lying and prosecutors hid evidence that the accused was innocence. </p>
<p>There also have been people given the death sentence for what looked like open and shut murder convictions. The people even may have confessed to murders they didn’t commit. Yes, that happens. Some people are mentally ill and will confess to anything.</p>
<p>In most cases, the only reason that innocent people were exonerated was due to DNA evidence providing they didn’t commit the crime. </p>
<p>What about people who are innocent in cases where there is no DNA evidence?</p>
<p>When it comes to providing punishment, ensuring public safety, and not killing innocent people, life imprisonment without parole provides all of these things.</p>
<p>" Just to summarize for people who don’t want to read that: he raped and murdered at least 140 children. Tortured them and slit their throats. He is suspected in up to 300 of these gruesome attacks. He cannot be in prison for more than 22 years, and may be up for parole in as little as 3 years because of good behavior. "</p>
<p>One reason why I support life imprisonment with no chance of parole for people who commit heinous crimes. I believe such a sentence is worse than execution. Check the link I posted in #17 to read what life is like for murderer Susan Atkins as she dies in prison of a brain tumor.</p>
<p>I think it was a very disgusting and vulgar thing he did, and I will say no.</p>
<p>First, I want to say I agree with Almost There who stated, “Yeah but technically the purpose of prison is to rehabilitate.” After I posted about Norwegian prisons I went and read about them. They are nothing like the jails in the USA, and I can certainly say they they =/= to Colombian prisons. There are no walls, you can work a day job, and you do activities with workers at the prison to show they everyone is equal.</p>
<p>Also, I do think that there should, of course, be punishment (jail), and that is why I think 22 years is enough, if it is done correctly; That’s why in the time a person is being punished and we fail to make them a regular and functional person in society then I think that is a failure of a justice system. </p>
<p>I would love to see statistics of criminals who commit crimes after going to Jail for each country.</p>
<p>The thing is the recidivism rate in america for prisoners released from prison in one year is 44.1% and in three years its 67.5%. With the death penalty the recidivism rate is zero and thats comforting to a lot of victims and they’re families. Knowing that they could possibly get out in a few years and hurt them or somebody else is scary. Either we need to fix our prison rehabilitation programs or we need to stop letting some of these people out. But one of the biggest problems are the psychopathic criminals they’re the ones who typically hide their behavior and they’re 2 and a half times are more likely to be released from jail even though they’re more dangerous. I don’t think there necessarily is a right answer but I think it should be handled on a case by case basis.</p>
<p>I have thought long and hard about this. To be honest, it is the overall mess of the system (more so than the moral implications) which make me say no to death penalty. I am a very liberal person, but I am more conservative with DP. It ****es me off, yes, but if you’re gonna kill him please don’t waste my tax money by putting the guy on appeal for 20 years. </p>
<p>If we decide to just kill them w/o appeal we lose the very core of our legal system, and if we keep it it’s a bloody waste of everyone’s money. So abolish it. </p>
<p>There was a time when I supported eye for eye. If one is convicted of murder his/her loved one could choose to kill the person, but then the whole world would be blind. I am a hypocrite (as are, I would guess (in this regard), most of you), I wouldn’t think twice before killing the man who murdered someone I love. But I wouldn’t do it unless I knew I was god damn SURE that he was the one.</p>
<p>It’s not the cruelty of the death that bothers me, it is the economic implications and the lack of enough evidence to justify death.</p>
<p>Zapz, in what universe is 22 years enough for this monster? You want to let him out? ** He raped and murdered nearly 300 innocent children** IN WHAT SICK AND TWISTED WAY IS IT EVER OK TO LET HIM OUT AND GIVE HIM THE CHANCE TO DO THAT AGAIN? When you are that sick, THERE IS NO REHABILITATION.</p>
<p>Thats the problem. I think if you can’t be rehabilitated there’s no reason to keep you alive.</p>
<p>I’d rather they suffer by living in a concrete slab with little human contact for the rest of their lives. Painless death by a needle is way too easy for the likes of people like him. Plus, it costs states millions of dollars (that they don’t have) to put someone on death row.</p>
<p>Yeah but a lot of times they aren’t suffering they get shelter and food and a lot of times they get TV and internet access.</p>
<p>Then take that away. At many max security places, they get nothing of the sort. They deserve an 8x10 concrete cell and three cheap, bland meals a day. That’s it. Nothing more, nothing less.</p>
<p>“Thats the problem. I think if you can’t be rehabilitated there’s no reason to keep you alive.”</p>
<p>How can anyone judge if anyone else can be rehabilitated? Read the link I posted in #17 and see what is happening to some lifers in Alabama who are volunteering to help other prisoners who are dying as they serve life in prison. </p>
<p>“I’d rather they suffer by living in a concrete slab with little human contact for the rest of their lives”</p>
<p>While prisoners – even on death row (which I have visited) aren’t living on concrete slabs, they aren’t living in blissful surroundings either. a 9x10 or so cell with a black and white TV, a single bed with a thin mattress, and a toilet isn’t the way most of us would choose to spend our lives. It’s noisy, privacy is limited as is the opportunity to even see the sky. Showers are regulated – once or twice a week, I think.</p>
<p>Then imagine dying while in prison after becoming disabled due to a chronic illness, which is likely how lifers will die. Even a botched electrocution would cause less suffering and trauma. That’s why I believe in life in prison without parole for people who have committed the most heinous crimes.</p>
<p>I wonder if the debate even matters- i mean it seems to me that whether we have the death penalty or not-crime will always be there. Do we kill someone who has committed a horrible crime? My grandma always told me that if a murderer was murdered , he would not go to hell…
But it really depends; I’m becoming more and more detatched from these things. No matter what anyone does- the dead person cannot be brought back. No matter what we say- America is wasting a lot of money shutting its prisoners up in jail. However, jailing prisoners does lower the crime rate. Letting them go free doesn’t. So why does Norway have a lower crime rate? The reason might lie in its social structure and small population…</p>
<p>People in max security prisons doing life aren’t getting cable TV. They are in solitary confinement. Sit in a small windowless cell 23 hours a day.</p>
<p>Also, jails aren’t just to rehabilitate. They are meant to keep the population safe. Nobody is getting out of a max security in solitary confinement. They are no danger to society.</p>
<p>But psychologically some victims would feel better knowing that the criminal was dead and can’t hurt them. Honestly if someone killed me or my family I wouldn’t want tham alive. maybe the victims should decide. but it shouldn’t be done if there’s ANY doubt that they did it.</p>
<p>"But psychologically some victims would feel better knowing that the criminal was dead and can’t hurt them. "</p>
<p>Psychologically many people would feel better if others who have hurt them were killed. In fact, some people murder others for that reason. However, that’s not a reason to kill anyone.</p>
<p>I know people who lost loved ones to murder and say that executing their murderers would be the last thing they’d want to happen. These people say that it would dishonor their deceased loved ones to kill anyone in their loved one’s names. They also say that they don’t want to inflict the kind of hurt that they have experienced on any other family – including the murderer’s family.</p>
<p>This includes an elderly friend whose 4-year-old grandson and daughter were brutally killed by a man the daughter was trying to help. The man is serving life in prison due in part to the woman’s asking the court to give him life in prison, not the death penalty. My friend is active in prison reform and also regularly communicates with the man who killed her loved ones. Her other grandson – the teen son of the woman who was killed – also is against the death penalty and even chose to write a high school paper about his views. </p>
<p>When my husband was in his teens, his cousin was shot to death. My husband’s mother identified the body because she didn’t want the cousin’s mother, her sister, to have to go through that. My husband is against the death penalty.</p>
<p>A friend’s brother was murdered. The friend and her mother are against the death penalty.</p>
<p>When another friend was about 3, an adult stranger killed her 4-year-old brother by pushing him out of a high rise window. My friend is against the death penalty.</p>
<p>Killing someone else won’t bring back anyone’s loved ones. I’ve also read of people who lived for the day that their loved one’s murderer would be executed. After the execution, the people realized that they still had the same pain they had had since the murder.</p>
<p>Yeah, the fact that revenge is the main reason for the DP pretty much signifies that it is totally wrong.</p>
<p>i agree here. havent read the whole thread, so apologies if this has been said, but it seems to me that it is a far worse punishment to be locked up for decades than to be killed rather painlessly. i know i’d rather end it quickly than have my life dragged out pointlessly like that…</p>
<p>K my new opinion on the matter:</p>
<p>The death penalty should be optional, with the other option being life in jail (heavy rehab is obviously the best choice, but costs may get too high (although I believe a life is priceless)). What really needs to be fixed is the justice system. We need to find a way to ensure that only the guilty are sentenced.</p>