Should life in prison be abolished?

[Franklin Delano Bluth]

It doesn't make it okay, but it also means that they cannot be help culpable, since they didn't know any better.

[Equestrian Democratic Republic]

It makes no sense to punish them, since it's not their fault they were never taught right from wrong in a manner that was effective to them.

How do you know that? Also even were that true that doesn't excuse their actions.

I think he is being satirical or something?

[Akadia North]

I like Lethal Injection more.

[Yousand]

I support life imprisonment, and also the death penalty in extreme cases.

However, life sentences without the possibility of parole should be abolished.

[Fintanland]

It makes no sense to punish them, since it's not their fault they were never taught right from wrong in a manner that was effective to them.

But was it their parents and teachers' fault that they were not taught how to teach right? Your argument is infinitely recursive, and thus sucks.

[Octogots]

many criminals deserve life
Their victims didn't have a second chance,did they ?

[Octogots]

I am opposed to life without parole, since it fundamentally attacks the notion of rehabilitation.
If they aren't rehabilitated, don't let them out.
If they are, whats the point in keeping them locked up

because the victim can't be rehabilitated from the dead. The old eye for an eye thingy

[Fintanland]

because the victim can't be rehabilitated from the dead. The old eye for an eye thingy

...makes the whole world blind. No, a much better reason for keeping some people locked up forever is that a very small minority of humans is literally too dangerous for contact with other humans.

[Octogots]

because the victim can't be rehabilitated from the dead. The old eye for an eye thingy

...makes the whole world blind. No, a much better reason for keeping some people locked up forever is that a very small minority of humans is literally too dangerous for contact with other humans.

not the whole world,just the first pokers (since they are in the minority and not the majority)

[Greater Nilfgaard]

It doesn't make it okay, but it also means that they cannot be help culpable, since they didn't know any better.

This is ridiculous. Humans are sentient beings not mindless ferrets. They know what their doing and if they commit a crime they should be punished.

[Evil Siamese Cats]

There has to be a way to avoid making criminals into hardened lifers with no hope without the whole "re-introducing them into society with all its risks" nonsense.

First of all, Norway has the focus for prisons right - rehabilitation first. Funny how people can get it right, for the most part, with kids - make sure it doesn't happen again and punishment is secondary - but for prisoners in the U.S., we expect to punish the fuck out of people and have them come out the other side saying, "Oh, Lordy, I'll never stray again," and being perfect model citizens after living in a shithole populated by people who look at them with disdain for years on end. Of course they're going to come out of that royally pissed off, and the fact that they inevitably have shitty lives on the outside to return to - a high likelihood of poverty and discrimination based on being an ex-con thanks to a system that expects them to get a job and be nornal citizens but gives them almost no opportunity to do so - means that their lives on the inside, as shitty as they probably are, are inevitably less shitty than their lives on the outside. (That is, unless they get into a position of power on the outside, but inevitably that leads to problems of its own, like the position being within a gang of some kind.)

Frankly, we need to adopt Norway's focus for prisons here with a close watch while they're on the inside to see what they are likely to do once released. True dangers can be kept for longer, of course, but people who are truly reformed should be re-introduced into society and given a genuine second chance. Anyone in-between? Hmmm...that's tricky. Maybe turn them into boring civil servants and put them in special communities with more freedom and the chance to have normal lives but with a bit more supervision. Kind of like a halfway house, but more, shall we say, homey.

[Franklin Delano Bluth]

Fintanland: You're right, it's not their teachers' fault either. It's no one's fault. Which means we need to forget about punishment and instead worry about improving our methods of moral education so that we can include more people.

[Fintanland]

Fintanland: You're right, it's not their teachers' fault either. It's no one's fault. Which means we need to forget about punishment and instead worry about improving our methods of moral education so that we can include more people.

This is too idealistic for me. Of course, we have to strive to perfect society. But crimes are happening RIGHT NOW, and I am uncomfortable with muggers, burglars and others remaining un-arrested. If only to keep them away from where they could commit more crimes for some time.

[Franklin Delano Bluth]

Greater Nilfgaard: Knowing what you're doing isn't the same thing as knowing that what you're doing is wrong.

Neither is knowing that other people think it is wrong. For instance, I'm quite aware that Rick Santorum and a number of other people think that the use of artificial contraception is wrong, but that doesn't mean that I have any compunctions over its use.

[Raeyh]

It doesn't make it okay, but it also means that they cannot be help culpable, since they didn't know any better.

If they weren't culpable, they would be in an insane asylum and not a prison.

[Galborg]

Abolish life sentences, if their crimes are that bad, hang 'em high.

[Fintanland]

Abolish life sentences, if their crimes are that bad, hang 'em high.

...then regret your decision when they turn out to be innocent, which has happened lots of times before. I dunno...

[Condunum]

All life has a death sentence.



Really? How do you re-integrate a serial killer? A serial rapist? A cannibal killer? A child predator?

By finding a method of teaching him right from wrong that works for him.

It's not his fault that his mind operates in such a way that none of the methods attempted previously worked.

You are quite possibly the most naive person on this board. Not everyone can be saved. You claim to have observed the world, yet you speak as though you've never left your home.

When someone is completely incapable of empathy, and sees the rest of humanity as nothing but subjects for him to abuse, there is a good chance he will never change from this view.

[Raeyh]

Really? How do you re-integrate a serial killer? A serial rapist? A cannibal killer? A child predator?

The sex offenders can be treated with (chemical) castration. I guess the murderer could be lobotomized, I can't think of any other treatment.

[Fintanland]

The sex offenders can be treated with (chemical) castration. I guess the murderer could be lobotomized, I can't think of any other treatment.

Life in prison is arguably more humane than a lobotomy, though. Plus, you did not so much make them change their ways as simply turned them into a different person surgically.

[Raeyh]

The sex offenders can be treated with (chemical) castration. I guess the murderer could be lobotomized, I can't think of any other treatment.

Life in prison is arguably more humane than a lobotomy, though. Plus, you did not so much make them change their ways as simply turned them into a different person surgically.

That's why I support life imprisonment. It really is the most humane option.

[Scocialist Provinces]

Well, if you're going to simultaneously make someone a miserable sod for the rest of their lives while chocking up your own prison system, then by all means, have your pretty life sentence.

Seriously, having no death penalty is a terrible idea. You're making every person given a life sentence live in a cell for the rest of their lives. That, kinda' sucks. Not just this, though. The United States has half of the world's prison population, and they're getting a little overcrowded. If we just killed every criminal with an offence that would regularly give them life in prison, then I bet your precious taxes would be a little lower.

[Fintanland]

Seriously, having no death penalty is a terrible idea. You're making every person given a life sentence live in a cell for the rest of their lives. That, kinda' sucks. Not just this, though. The United States has half of the world's prison population, and they're getting a little overcrowded. If we just killed every criminal with an offence that would regularly give them life in prison, then I bet your precious taxes would be a little lower.

Or you could, you know, stop electing politicians who pretend to be "tough on crime" by simply raising sentences, and end this silly war on drugs. But no, by all means, the more humane solution is of course: FASTER PUSSYCAT! KILL! KILL!

[Raeyh]

If we just killed every criminal with an offence that would regularly give them life in prison, then I bet your precious taxes would be a little lower.

Let's not kill people to save money. I don't want to be euthanized by the state when I reach old age.

[Condunum]

Well, if you're going to simultaneously make someone a miserable sod for the rest of their lives while chocking up your own prison system, then by all means, have your pretty life sentence.

Seriously, having no death penalty is a terrible idea. You're making every person given a life sentence live in a cell for the rest of their lives. That, kinda' sucks. Not just this, though. The United States has half of the world's prison population, and they're getting a little overcrowded. If we just killed every criminal with an offence that would regularly give them life in prison, then I bet your precious taxes would be a little lower.

No. If we were to put all prisoners that have a life sentence on death row, we'd probably collapse the budget. Death Row is noticeably more expensive than life imprisonment.