death or life imprisonment?
914003
Life imprisonment.I have children,and although I would be locked up I would still get to see my kids.That would be worth being locked up for,and would give me the strength and focus to spend my life there.Plus I would have future grandchildren to think of,letters,photos,drawings.These days prisons have everything,TV,DVD etc.All mod cons.It wouldn't bother me,I could even have a computer and spend my days answering questions!!\nI love reading,so could borrow loads of books,I could do crosswords,sewing.It would be easy to keep entertained.
435811
Advantage - if prosecutors purposefully or accidentally made a mistake, they can release the guy from jail.  They can't, however, un-dead him.\n\nAdvantage - Imposing a life sentence is cheaper (even counting the cost of incarceration) than imposing the death sentence.\n\nAdvantage - If you don't execute the person, you don't have to turn someone on the state payroll into a murderer.\n\nAdvantage - Life inmates can work.  Death row inmates are not allowed to work.
404068
a better punishment would be to lock him up for life in solitary confinement in a maximum security prison in an undisclosed location. There he could spend the rest of his days dwelling on his crimes and be judged by god when he dies. It would be worse to spend 25 years in solitry confinment than to be gone.
592628
From what I heard, if he gets a life sentence he will be in solitary confinement for the rest of his life.  Why bother?  And as for being executed, why make him a martyr?\n\nI think he should be put in prison with the general population for the rest of his life.  I bet he wouldn't last a week, maybe not even a day.
85206
This is up for huge debate. Still much to be decided on this by the courts.\n\nAs for my thoughts on the matter. I believe any person should have the right to die if they are aware of their irreversable situation of health or whatever. I also believe that a "living will" that explains a person's wishes not to be left in a vegetative state should be upheld as well.
331796
I am for the death penalty.  Except that it has become a non-deterent because people spend years and years on death row.  Not only does that lose the intended impact...but it costs a fortune to keep someone on death row.\n\nI think they should get one appeal.  If they lose that appeal, they should be executed within 30 days.
873963
Lifetime imprisonment and hard labour.
620757
The tug and pull can be summed up as the theoretical and the reality.  For the first, I would want us to rehabilitate people, make them into productive members of society - that maximizes social good.  Reality is, that aint gonna happen for some people, and many come out worse than they went in.  Theoretically, putting someone in prison for life is more expensive.  Reality, a death row appeal ends up costing more dollars b/c of the expense to the taxpayer on the legal system.  Theoretically, we should tell people that killing is wrong, and teaching that lesson by doing the same.  Reality is, people commit crimes not with fear of the level of punishment, but by balancing the likelihood of getting caught.\nReality - society doesn't care, and most people dont care what ridiculously high percentage of people get railroaded by the justice system.\nBut I will say this from my personal opinion, I am tired of caring for people that want to whine about how their punishment isnt fair.  People make choices, and if you step outside the bounds society lays out, they shouldn't be surprrised that they don't like how society reacts.
755022
Currently it is more expensive to keep someone on deathrow until execution than it is to keep them in prison for life.  Some estimates say that it can be up to three times as much to execute someone.  You cannot shorten the appeals process because of our constitutional right to appeal.
963657
Many people are in favor of the death penalty for certain criminals who are deemed worthless to society. How is euthanizing severely disabled babies different than killing a criminal? Both are making value judgements about a life.\n\nI am a liberal, and I am conflicted about such questions. Why pay to keep someone alive if they will never contribute to society? And, why keep a severely disabled child alive that will be a drain on society? But, life is precious; how can we as humans effectively decide that a life is worthless when we cannot know the ultimate outcome?
250222
Death penalty. Chi ching!\n\n(joke)
1058696
Judges formally have to give 2 consecutive life sentences because thats the punishment the crimes calls for. Of course it does not mean their bodies sit in jail after they die, it would rot!\nIf it was only 1 person that was murdered, the person could get two life sentences because one would be for the act of homicide while the other might be for a felony the defendant was committing simultaneously with the crime. (I.E. A person commits first degree sexual assault then murders the victim during the same act.)\n\nThe point it, the judge must formally give the defendant his sentencing. But you are right, the symantics and logic of "you will be in prison until you die" serves the same purpose but the first one is much less grusom to the listeners ear.
362624
Each state has its own set of sentencing guidelines.\n\nAs to the other apart of your statement, the charge would stick, as long as the person lives...additional charges would be filed if should they die as a result of the action. And NO, the judge isn't going to lenient because you're a lousy shot!
633507
We stopped capital punishment many years ago in this country (UK).  The result has been that murders are on the increase every year, as a 'life' sentence can see a prisoner released in as few as six years with good behaviour etc.\n\nThe absence of capital punishment, in my belief, discriminates against the victim.  With the advent of DNA fingerprinting, the chances of convicting the wrong person for a crime should be 3,000,000:1.  Unfortunate if you are the 1, but far more likely that you would be in the 3,000,000 - unless, of course, you committed the crime....
348109
You want to plagiarize to prove your point. Haven't you got any point of view of your own? This is a debate !!! It should reflect your views. Hahaha. \n\nYou should go a step ahead. One of the liberals spoke about banning life imprisonment and suggesting it to be maximum of 4 years. And one spoke about granting more rights to serial killers. Way to go!
463140
I too believe that life without parole should be the maximum sentence for any crime.  In a world where the law and conviction system is full of inaccuracies it is too much of a risk to sentence someone to death-EVEN with a confession there is always the chance that they are innocent or did not play as big a part in a murder as they claim to have done.  Its AMAZING the amount of false confessions people will make under pressure-particularly those with a learning difficulty.  Also, the people who are actively involved in the execution of prisoners are surely then also commiting murder and they will have been involved in the deaths of many more people than the inmates they are executing-does that then mean that they deserve to die for choosing a career that involves the killing of others? \nThe death penalty is in no way a deterrent (this is a statistical fact) to murder either and is purely a 'revenge' punishment.  \nIt is not up to anyone to take the life of another and after all who decides who lives and who dies for murder?  Some murder/rapists get life, and another one time murderer could get death. It is a decision that NO-ONE should be allowed to make and it is ALL about Governments having the ultimate control-Death Row Inmates can be put on SUICIDE WATCH if they are deemed 'at risk'.  By all means give them life in prison with a little less of the luxuries they currently receive, but we cannot choose and ponder over who lives and who dies.
90444
Is that a trick question?  It is until they die, unless the judge has set a chance for parole.